The 2000 MCAS Citizens MCAS Task Force chaired by Dove Lewis, directed the county to charter a process for progressive humane sheltering at MCAS. It emphasized and incorporated the community’s values and included participants from the community including veterinarians as major participants. It was about ending the needless killing of companion animals. Animals were not to be put to death unless they were irremediably suffering or had a behavior challenge that even after behavior interventions presented a serious public safety risk.
The implementation of humane sheltering charter included:
An MCAS shelter Review Committee
The committee included staff, volunteers, rescues, interested citizens, and, twice a month, a diplomate in behavioral veterinary medicine attended. The diplomate in behavioral veterinary medicine also was on contract to provide animal behavior advice on various agency cases.
The Shelter Review Committees meetings were conducted as open public sessions. Their goal was to seek options and solutions for animals in need. It was not to kill them.
October 2015: The dismantling of the citizens’ task force directive for humane sheltering
The dismantling of MCAS’ humane sheltering mission began with the hiring of Jackie Rose as MCAS Director in late October 2015. Behind closed doors and without scrutiny, Director Jackie Rose created policies contrary to humane sheltering. These policies are still in place today. Director Rose created an authoritarian agency, removing by fiat all public participation and an open democratic decision making process.
The Shelter Review meetings became a private affair: managers only. Decisions about euthanasia no longer permitted public, staff, volunteer or expert participation or input. In new policy statements, staff, citizens and volunteers were denied any say in euthanasia decisions and told they were not permitted to explore options. Meetings once held weekly, during which animal dispositions were discussed and reviewed, now could occur at any time any day of the week. No quorum was required. A pilot behavior and training program, initiated by staff and volunteers to train dogs with special needs to become adoptable, was shut down without explanation or notice.
April 2019: Jackie Rose left to assume the directorship of Ventura California Animal Control after a 2016 and 2018 poor performance audits. Jackie Rose was ousted ‘retired with honors’ from Ventura Animal Control late 2023 after community backlash over precisely the same leadership she showed in MCAS, beginning with the unjust euthanasia of a specific dog.
February 2020: MCAS Client Services Supervisor Wade Sadler took over as acting director, an assignment made permanent shortly after a hasty public advertisement for the director’s position. There was no credible search for a replacement. The directorship was handed down. The failed policies and practices created by Jackie Rose continued under Wade Sadler.
July 2022: Erin Grahek, a former case manager after failing to advance at the Department of Aging and Disabilities, was appointed acting MCAS director and assumed the directorship permanently in July 2022 during the height of an animal care crisis at MCAS. The external search for a director was cursory and short.
While acknowledging her lack of experience (never having served in any capacity in animal services or welfare), Erin Grahek assured the public she would lead by deferring her power and authority to the agency managers.
“Grahek didn’t come to Animal Services with any animal welfare experience. ‘ I will bring on strong professionals who have the animal welfare background that I don’t, and marry that with my experience as a manager and a leader in Multnomah County,’ Grahek said.”
Under their direction, given the creation of a power vacuum, managers replaced the goals of pet redemption and retention with pre-select adoptions marked by significant returns. They dismantled and removed the entire support system for pet retention and redemption: Emergency Board and Pets in Crisis, advising citizens it was not their job. ‘They were not a hotel.’ No official permission was sought for their unilateral change in the agency’s mission from pet retention and redemption to cheap animal sales.
At the same time animal care was undermined, animals with medical care, behavior or other concerns were assigned waivers disowning all responsibility. Fear waivers most often reflect agency conditions for which MCAS is responsible. Now it’s the animal’s “fault,” not the agency’s responsibility.
Dolly’s Fund, a public fund restricted to the special medical care needs of shelter is seldom accessed for animals anymore. If a rescue will not take them, they are killed or adopted with waivers. All compassion for vulnerable animals has vanished. The managers ended medical and hospice fosters. If they cannot be transferred they are killed.
MCAS euthanasia policies were unilaterally changed by the managers. When they failed to succeed at their assignment, they lowered the bar to allow themselves to count failure as success.
No input from others invested in an animal’s life is permitted. The process is not open. The term ‘Shelter Review’ has been renamed ‘Rounds Review’ for a process that has nothing in common with hospital rounds review among professionals. Euthanasia decisions continue to be decided by managers without any background in animal behavior, science or training. The statements made justifying euthanasia for any given animal in nearly every record defy the facts, professional decision making and risk assessment processes. Animals are killed as “unhealthy and untreatable” when they are not. It is a deliberate and a self serving deception intended to mislead the public and conceal their failures. Only the animals are victims and pay the price.
MCAS continues to fail. The leadership is authoritarian. Management is largely selected through a process of nepotism not qualifications.
That is the challenge County Chair Jessica Vega Pederson, the Board of Multnomah County Commissioners and Department of Community Services Director Margi Bradway face: Either honor public service and the lives of shelter animals in their care or to capitulate to management welfare and failure.
Before I started this website, I would post about the same issues as I do here on a Change.org petition towards Multnomah County government. 8 years later, MCAS has only gotten worse in terms of animal and community welfare. The closest they got to an animal enrichment improvement was from a playgroup program inspired by Dogs Playing for Life, which has been corrupted into another ‘test’ to see if a dog should be killed due to ‘playgroup challenges’ (let alone the insanity of putting dogs in heat in playgroups). Every budgeted goal has failed; Every concern outlined and referenced in my 2018 update and in plenty of investigative media publications, even the county’s own audits, have been ignored.
Pet redemption and retention
Pet redemption and retention have dropped further to about 25% for FY 2025, even as the redemption rate at Washington County Bonnie Hayes Animal Shelter was reported as being between 72% and 75% as of Calendar year 2023 as following the creation of a program developed by previous director, Deborah Wood.
MCAS’ rates have fallen because they ended the Pets in Crisis and Emergency Board programs, while prioritizing pre-selection adoptions during stray and owner hold periods. When persons are struggling because of evictions or crises (e.g. hospitalizations, jail time, etc), who often don’t have friends or family upon whom they can rely, they impose strict deadlines (6 days for owned animals) instead of helping owners find solutions. This has caused some to leave hospitalization against medical advice to keep their animals.
While some owner surrenders are driven by crises, others are driven by owners not understanding animal behavior challenges leading to a belief that they have no choice but to surrender their animals. MCAS offers no owner surrender counseling or solutions to prevent future incidents, save for surrendering the animal.
A further detriment to redemption is the sheer distance to Troutdale from Portland, as over 80% of shelter animals are from Portland. Often, persons redeeming their pets must depend upon public transportation, one bus line and MAX transit, both of which are about a mile away from the shelter. There is no volunteer effort to transport animals to their owners when they are handicapped or otherwise unable to find transportation. The plan to create a new shelter in Troutdale, given the lack of transportation options and assistance, does nothing to address this issue.
Spay/Neuter
As of July, 2025, animals no longer leave MCAS spayed and neutered. Allegedly, this is because of a claimed national veterinary shortage, despite MCAS having the same number of veterinarians on staff (2 veterinarians) and an equivalent or lower intake compared to data from MCAS animal trends from fiscal year 2017, noting that they’ve never had more than 2 veterinarians since 1995.
Peeling back the rings of government failure, what is left is a hollow space where government accountability has been eliminated.
Without oversight and a formal system of accountability, management has filled the leadership void left by the current Director Erin Grahek. Director Grahek was appointed without credentials or any relevant background in animal sheltering or animal behavior science, which she has acknowledged and dismissed with the ‘solution’ that she would delegate all necessary expertise to management. “‘I will bring on strong professionals who have the animal welfare background that I don’t, and marry that with my experience as a manager and a leader in Multnomah County,’ Grahek said.”
At MCAS, promotions are based upon relative ability not accomplishment; failure is excused, swept under the carpet. Philip Zimbardo, a nationally acclaimed social psychologist writing about the power of social pressures, concluded that it is the barrel that spoils the apples, (“Lucifer Effect,”, Philip Zimbardo, Random House Publishing Group, 2007). Once the culture takes root, substantive change requires an independent qualified leader focused upon compassion and results, not neo-liberal hand wringing.
The animals, workers, volunteers and staff pay the price for this government heist: The theft of public service.
Owner Redemption rate = ‘Returned to owner’ ÷ ‘Intake’ Counts are for Dogs, Puppies, Cats, and Kittens. ‘Intake’ is specific to ‘Stray or at large’ and ‘Owner Surrenders’ types.
Where, as in the movie Groundhog Day, people and animals are
“doomed to spend the rest of eternity in the same place, seeing the same people do the same thing EVERY day.”
On September 05, 2018, the director of Multnomah County Animal Services (MCAS), Jackie Rose, responded to the second poor audit report by announcing that MCAS was “working” to correct the severe problems identified by the audits and that the agency has been long aware of the work that must be done, claiming that the agency had met or was working on “79 percent of the auditor’s 2016 recommendations.”
Whatever Ms. Rose may claim about her awareness and continuing work, nothing has improved under her management. The public records and citizen reports confirm that “the same people do the same thing” every day. The absence of animal enrichment efforts continues. “Enrichment” can’t be provided with a Kong in every kennel and a scratching post for every cat. What is needed is a stress-free welcoming environment providing walks, pats, and a kind tone. That remains absent. No progress has been made. And the animals continue to suffer.
MCAS lacks empathy and has exhibited an absolute failure to understand and plan for the demographics it serves as the only public shelter in Multnomah County. Most of the unredeemed stray animals are impounded in the areas of deepest poverty. Most enforcement citations and penalties are issued to the poor. Unlike other progressive shelters, MCAS has no pet retention programs. These are some of the problems facing the agency.
Failure to meet the needs of its Demographics
Multnomah’s public shelter demographic is disproportionately represented by animals and persons in need, often in crisis, poor or homeless, presenting with problems that are magnified by notices of infraction and fines and redemption fees unaffordable to many. MCAS’ 51% owner redemption rate for dogs pales to insignificance when compared to other local agencies such as neighboring (and far less generously funded) Washington County Dog Services’ 67% rate. The evidence can be seen in the most recent records. Life is made difficult if you are poverty stricken and they come for your companion dog. What follows are case examples, few among the many. They are not “isolated” cases.
Failure to meet the needs of senior citizens on low incomes
Alfred, is a blind 14-year-old poodle mix impounded by MCAS on September 24, 2018 when the apartment manager failed to recognize him as a senior citizen tenant’s dog. Upon realizing that he had a dedicated owner, the manager called the county the same day and was told there would be an impound fee that the owner could not afford. Then the saga of trying to bring Clancy back home again began.
No offer to reach out to the owner was made. MCAS just moved on with its daily stray dog protocol pattern. Alfred was put through the behavior test on September 28, adopted September 29, and returned the following day on September 30, for “whining and barking when left alone.” He was placed back up in the adoption page. A good Samaritan, aware of his plight, called the apartment manager, located the name and address of his owner, and then contacted the county commissioner for the district, requesting that she facilitate a return of this old dog to his owner.
The first report back to the senior owner was that Alfred had died while at the agency. That was wrong but Alfred did have severe kennel cough. Wary of the commissioner’s involvement, MCAS returned the dog, claiming credit for all that the Samaritan had done. Alfred’s stay at MCAS caused him and his owner serious physical illness and emotional stress that could have been easily avoided just by caring about public service and the needs of fragile citizens.
Making it hard on homeless and fragile persons in crisis when “Where is the money” is the first concern
Madeline, an emotional support Chihuahua, belongs to a psychologically fragile homeless person who in the past year has experienced several successive hospitalizations, most recently on September 13. When she came to reclaim her dog on September 19, she was turned away with the official statement that “Since Jammie had no money and has 2 [prior] payment plans, I requested she return with some money to reclaim Madeline, and I would waive 1-day board. Jammie said she would be back on Thursday 9/20 with $5.” Jammie scraped up the $5 ransom and returned. A poverty stricken psychologically frail homeless person was taught an “object” lesson.
But the lesson cost more than $5. Those without private transportation, most often poor, and/or disabled have proven difficulties getting to MCAS’s Troutdale location. The journey takes 2-3 hours each way on public transportation by MAX train or bus. The county’s only “public shelter” needs to be but is not where the people are. In 2008, it was noted that 84% of MCAS’s population came from Portland. The shelter plans to continue to be located far away from those it serves.
Boomer, a 2-year-old Golden Retriever was impounded on September 28, 2018 when his owner, a senior citizen, was hospitalized and then moved to assisted living. She would not be coming home again. On the same day, September 28, 2018, the owner’s sister called MCAS reporting that the owner was in care and unable to redeem Boomer herself, that she too was worried about costs but would see what she could arrange for her hospitalized sister. The only MCAS response was: “there could be the possibility of a fee reduction if she qualified.”
Unstated was the fact that the possibility of a fee reduction was small or non-existent. The standard MCAS policy is that no fee reduction is permitted to those who come as proxies. One day later, on September 29, the day after the telephone call from the sister seeking redemption help, MCAS records report that:
“09/29 Called [the home telephone number for the hospitalized owner who was clearly not “home”]. Left message with Animal ID, Hold time, Shelter Number and said to call us back with any questions or to reclaim come to the shelter with proof of ownership, Photo ID, and fees will apply.” (emphasis added).
Family circumstances and crises don’t interrupt the county’s singular, self-absorbed goal: the trains must run on time. Life and citizens’ needs cannot get in the way. The lack of empathy demonstrated in this response for a citizen in crisis and the refusal to take the time needed for humane problem solving characterize almost every new policy directive from the Director Rose. The vulnerable get left behind. Too bad for them.
MCAS has a social civic duty as a public county agency to refer owners in need to options for care for their dogs and themselves. Don’t just walk away after issuing a “no license” ticket. If someone is clearly struggling don’t just “educate them” about “minimum care requirements for Multnomah county” and depart. If they are not connected to social services and have a need, alert them to sources for help. That does not happen.
On June 18, 2018, a concerned citizen reported that “a beagle – mix dog is being kept inside alone for days at a time without anyone checking on it,” adding that the “home is not air conditioned and there is mold visible on the front door” and that “the owner has been gone since Saturday and just returned today (Monday) at noon.” Noting that food and fresh water were available and that “minimum care” standards had not been violated, the responding officer reported the need to purchase a license and “educated” the owner about the minimum standards of care for Multnomah county which she was already with great effort meeting. There was no “education” about services available to low income persons, no mention of the PAW Team for veterinary care, the Pongo Fund for dog food; or social services for help with the mold that might compromise her health. MCAS has wholly disconnected itself from other agencies and non-profit support groups that serve impoverished populations and are critical to a public shelter’s success.
Failure to seek and to utilize and professional expertise needed for a public shelter population cost compassion and lives
The population “served” by MCAS is most like that of an inner-city hospital. It is the place of last resort as an “open admissions” public shelter for the county and the city of Portland. MCAS can either honor its demographic requirements and rise to become a “premier agency” or continue to fail. Unlike animals accepted at private humane societies, animals from poor areas often arrive at MCAS emotionally traumatized and at times with serious physical injuries. These conditions require expertise. None exists at MCAS under Ms. Rose’s direction.
What MCAS lacks could be provided from outside the shelter’s walls. Unfortunately, no outside behavior expertise is sought. Improved care cannot occur without education and expert participation. Ignorance costs lives. Nothing new is ever gained by killing for want of knowledge.
Dr. Christopher Pachel, a diplomate in veterinary behavioral medicine, one of the few credentialed diplomates with an advanced veterinary behavior medicine degree in the country, once attended meetings twice monthly at MCAS and was available to staff for assistance, all for a very nominal retainer. That no longer occurs. The door to expertise has been closed. Instead, “canine specialists” with limited knowledge and backgrounds have replaced a critically needed asset. This change has nothing to do with costs. It results from management preferences for ignorance, a refusal to learn anything new, and acceptance of unnecessary killing.
Very few dogs are truly “unsafe.” That is a misnomer. Agency generated stress and careless or ignorant practices create safety issues. The label “unsafe” reflects the level of staff training and education and a refusal to accept outside professional input. It is not about the dog.
Dale, an injured pit bull about 8 years old, was taken to care at Dove Lewis Emergency Veterinary Hospital on September 13, 2018. He was seriously injured with his “ear ripped off, and head wounds,” After he was stabilized the next day, Dale was transferred to MCAS, where on further examination it was noted that, although able to eat and drink, his tongue had been severed. After the agency’s behavior assessment on September 19, a test he was required to “pass,” he went into foster care with a family that had 2 other dogs.
When a dog’s history is unknown and includes known serious physical abuse and significant emotional trauma, a graduated professional incremental program is critical to maximize success. The program can be carried out by a trained foster or experienced rescue and should be designed to set both dog and person up for success. But that did not happen. On the day following placement, the foster reported a scuffle between one of her dogs and Dale over a toy found in the yard. Dale was reinjured, his wounds to his face and ear were reopened and further emergency care at Dove Lewis was needed.
At that point in time any professional would have stepped back and created a new plan for Dale’s environment. MCAS did not. On September 29, the foster reported that while playing ball
“as I leaned down to pick up the ball, Dale jumped and mouthed my neck. It not hurt or break the skin. I really felt like he was just excited. We continued playing ball with no more incidents.”
The foster decided to put Dale into “sit-stay” training to teach Dale to wait before seeking the ball and avoid another jumping/mouthy incident. It worked. A solution had been found. Nevertheless, MCAS ordered Dale back to the shelter and immediately killed him despite the written reports from the family about his gentleness, and his grace in acceptance of being spoon fed. Dale was not at all food aggressive; he slept on their bed. The “sit/stay” plan had worked.
MCAS killed Dale for “height seeking behavior” when ball retrieving despite the foster’s clear report that she was bending down to get the ball when the incident happened.
There was no aggressive behavior. None of Dale’s other behaviors suggested dominance, only submission and docility. The one dog fight over a stuffed dog toy found in the yard lasted a minute. Only he was hurt. MCAS gave that dog fight as a second reason death and sacrificed his life out of catastrophic fantasies contradicted by the foster’s narrative itself. MCAS killed Dale out of entitled arrogance, reactivity, and unchecked ignorance, never once consulting available experts. The decision-making process for animal dispositions excludes all professionals and trainers in the community. To keep control, Jackie Rose has all life and death decisions made by in house management, primarily administrative and enforcement staff. Even animal care staff who work with and see animals daily are excluded from any participation. Other views that might challenge her control are “unsafe.”
Dale had the briefest moment to know love and kindness with his foster family. In the few days he lived with them, they were making all the thoughtful necessary adjustments before MCAS intervened. What Director Rose does best is to destroy compassion with an iron fist. Never are expert opinions sought. If she does not “feel good” about the dog, killing is the solution. The world runs according to her wishes, not this communities’ values and compassion.
The majority of animals at MCAS are afraid. Liability waivers designed to protect the agency are a required part of every finalized adoption. The newly adopted shelter dog a citizen is taking home leaves as a tiny four-legged felon. The waivers include warnings about perceived “handling sensitivities;” “Jumpy/mouthy/hyper;” and “fear.” The reality is that these are all temporary reactions to agency generated stress, including the manner in which frightened animals are tested over and over again with escalating intrusions intended to see what it takes to make a dog snap (one example: push head out of bowl while a dog is trying to eat). Puppies are tested. Ill dogs are tested; so too are the injured and physically handicapped despite the fact that these are all factors that compromise valid findings and can only be lessened by a humane environment that Director Rose refuses to create.
What MCAS causes cannot be “cured’ by a Kong in every kennel. While on Intake the dogs are isolated. There is no socialization. The noise level is considered so “unsafe” that visitors are offered ear plugs to abide by OSHA requirements. Lights blaze all night for security purposes lest someone try to break in and steal a stray dog. The conditions at MCAS can break the gentlest dog. A dog’s first experience with any human being after impound is in the BA room when they are “evaluated.” No wonder the animals are scared. The rule is “What does it take to make the dog crack? How far can we intrude? How can we indemnify ourselves against dog behavior?” MCAS does not ask how it can help set a dog up for success in a new home. The burden falls on the dog’s capacity to tolerate rude intrusions. MCAS creates the stress and then advances “cures” in the form of individual “behavior modification programs” limited to teaching volunteers, for example, how to leash and walk a scared dog by giving treats, normal activities that should be available to all dogs. The overall stress that leads to fear is not addressed.
Jenna, a small terrified rat terrier confiscated from an abandoned house was an emergency boarding with known owners. She was processed quickly after impoundment on September 14, 2018 and “tested” two days, long before the five day hold on September 16. with the following recorded entries:
“’Frozen in dog bed. Picked up and carried to BA room. Shaking, no interest shown throughout test.’ Move to adoptions. Adult only home; Dog allows handling/no signs of enjoyment/stiff/no eye contact. Unable to see true personality.’ Fear waiver.”
There was no regard for this small traumatized dog. She had to be processed because the goal is moving dogs out fast down the assembly line to a disposal set point.
Annabelle, is a middle-aged female pit bull dragged roughly into the agency on September 23, 2018 by owners tired of her. Tested on September 27th the notes read as follows:
“Easy to leash…then refused to walk. Fit with harness and tried to coax her, She would not budge and then layed [sic] down…Tried to gently push her back end and she head whipped…Found several broken and warn down teeth. [Shelter manager] took over so I could continue with BAs’.”
Delilah, a 5-year-old anxious Yorkshire/Terrier poodle given up by her owner on September 14, 2018, because she was moving and could not take Delilah with her. MCAS described Delilah’s fear upon entering the agency as “undersocialization.” She was just scared and far from home. She was “tested” on September 22, with the following note:
“Retreated for attempts to leash, snapping and trying to bite when wrapping in blanket. Calmed once in my arms. Stiff and shaking carried to BA room.”
No one can properly assess a terrified dog’s usual temperament but that is not MCAS’s goal. Running the dogs through the system, then getting them on the “floor” and aiming for a ‘high live release” is worth sacrificing the animal. It is perversely twisted around. The animals serve the agency, not the other way around.
MCAS could operate as a shelter without walls by rapidly moving animals to rescues with the time and experience to care. But that doesn’t happen. Since the new director Jackie Rose took charge, rescues must wait for “invitations” to rescue while all the time witnessing animals killed that they could have saved. Rescues are not part of reviews and decisions. Only Jackie Rose may decide. In 2014, 372 dogs went to rescues; in 2016 that figure was down to 135. The only explanation for this decline, for this failure to take advantage of local resources, is poor leadership.
Nothing has changed at MCAS since the 2016 audit or the 2018 audit and nothing will improve on the current course. The stress experienced by animals and staff alike are the result of all the new policies and practices touted as “progress.” MCAS operates in a culture of fear and suspicion where “outsiders” are unwelcome and stray dogs are viewed as potential dangers, hazards and liabilities. The existing culture pervades staff and volunteers. Every minor negative reaction a dog has while housed in a hostile environment is recorded as if it were a “misdemeanor” (lifted lip at me; snapped), stored, counted, and then used as justification for a death sentence. Only a small contingency of management staff is permitted to be part of the decision making and secretive Shelter Review disposition process. No notes are kept. Animals are on trial for their lives. The fact that these behaviors are correctable, often stress related, and directly attributable to failed animal welfare conditions MCAS itself generates is ignored. MCAS takes no responsibility for the culture it creates. The system is closed to input. You are either “in” or “out.” There is little real and genuine outreach into the community at large. MCAS does not serve.
What happened yesterday will continue to happen tomorrow. And it’s Groundhog Day, again.
A magic program for creating the appearance of success when an agency is failing
The challenge is accounting for the health and well being of animals in their care. The task is how to kill shelter animals without being held to account. The method is to make animals responsible for their own deaths. This is the process:
1. Eliminate expertise and the community to expedite killing by dismantling every element of community and professional participation and involvement.
The Citizens Advisory Committee which is not comprised of stakeholders and is not transparent does not count. It is a distraction.
How did MCAS become an authoritarian regime?
2016 under then Director Jackie Rose training programs and professional experts with behavior and training backgrounds who once advised and participated in disposition decisions and training for animals were eliminated. So was the participation of volunteers, staff and any member of the public who once had permission to participate in disposition decisions. At the same time a policy was initiated eliminating a Shelter Review quorum in euthanasia decisions now permitting an animal to be euthanized at any time based upon any one or two managers’ decisions.
“Modified Shelter Review Process to be daily and/or as needed, as opposed to weekly with animals waiting up to six (6) days for decision making. (November 2015).” Part of the summary of accomplishments presented by Jackie Rose to Department of Community Services Director, upon her departure in April 2029.
2023 MCAS’ Policy of Euthanasia (effective as of 11/28/23), “consideration of placement for pets who may be eligible for placement is not a guarantee of placement, that “other considerations for euthanasia may include the available resources to manage or address the needs of the animal, as well as lack of available placement opportunities.” (https://www.multcopets.org/sites/default/files/2024-03/MCAS-PLC-001%20v1%20Euthanasia%20Policy.pdf)
MCAS managers have repeatedly declined to respond to the following questions stating “no responsive documents.”
The employment positions /professions of the Shelter Review Committee members (positions not names).
The animal behavior science and training credentials of the Shelter Review Committee members.
The outside consultants of the Shelter Review Committee: The public was supposed to be part of establishing euthanasia guidelines.
The minimum number of attendees when euthanasia decisions are made.
The transcript records of discussions for euthanasia decisions permitting transparency.
The decision making process for euthanasia dispositions.
The parties in charge of supervising the committee’s adherence to standards and holding the Shelter Review Committee accountable.
“It’s a mystery” as the Catholic Church would say about the unfathomable when unwilling to respond.
2. Label all dogs killed for behavior or medical reasons, “unhealthy and untreatable” despite objective evidence to the contrary in nearly every case. It relieves the responsibility of working.
3. Claim a “lack of resources” or “available placement options” to excuse a lack of effort, initiative, and their management failures: “We tried, then cried.”
4. Treat animals as criminals listing ‘crimes’ committed, then kill them for preventable incidents caused primarily by human error and ignorance including management’s shocking lack of skills and knowledge. Don’t create an intervention program.
5. Turn the shelter into a pet store and commodities market. Quote inapplicable research as justification: “Free or nearly free animals are just as loved.” No, they are not, flying back at warp speed as “adoption returns.” Selling animals at rock bottom prices, $25, to anyone, giving them a free “try out,” discourages commitment and encourages returns within 2 weeks for a complete refund if an animal does not work out; No owner education provided.
6. Take owner surrendered dogs for $50no questions asked, provide no owner surrender counseling to help owners understand reasons behind incidents, and how to prevent incidents and alternatives to surrender. Its the cheapest option in town to get rid of your now inconvenient companion animal.
7. Glorify dog bites as incredibly dangerous unpreventable threats to “public safety” that can only be resolved by killing. Most bite incidents can be prevented. Here is the answer.
“I have long suspected that many people perceive injuries from dog bites through a different lens (possibly a magnifying glass) than the one they use for injuries from other ordinary causes. In fact the data on ER and hospital treatment for dog bites bear out this suspicion. As a class of injury receiving medical treatment, dog bites, on average, are less severe (according to the accepted measurement, called an injury severity scale) than any other class of common injury.
The average treated dog bite is rated as minor, at the lowest level, 1 out of 6. (a Level 1 injury is one from which the person recovers quickly with no lasting impairment, a level 6 is one likely to be fatal. Only one percent of all treated bites rate as more severe than Level 1.” (“Dogs bite but balloons and slippers are more dangerous” Janis Bradley, James and Kenneth Publishers 2005, page 47)
Ironically MCAS does magnify all bite pictures because often the bites that have broken the skin are not clearly visible without magnification and bites that are visible are magnified to enhance effect.
8. Create a management dynasty based upon internal loyalty to the throne, advancing others according to loyalty to management not ethics, public service or competence. The effect is harmful to public service. For example, the current director, Erin Grahek, has proven herself to be wholly unsuited to lead MCAS, appointed to MCAS as director after not advancing at the Department of Aging and Disabilities. I don’t know why failure at one agency leads to promotion at another in Troutdale. MCAS has become the consolation prize for failing elsewhere in government. Multnomah County government’s welfare program is “Leave no manager behind,” prioritizing management welfare over public service.
By hiring an inexperienced person as MCAS director what was created instead of “strong leadership” was a power vacuum. Since human nature abhors a power vacuum, ambitious middle level managers filled it in, with the goal of creating an agency that works for them. It meant replacing caring for animals, pet redemption and public service with caring for themselves: Vacations, and 36/44 hour work weeks take precedence.
This is a short list from public records/citizens’ reports. Can this be corrected? The fish rots from the head. No, not unless honest government accountability replaces indifference and failure is not hidden by government propaganda behind which failure lies. That task belongs to the Multnomah County Board of Commissioners.
Over 2 years later nothing has changed but the cover: Animals are still suffering and are being killed indiscriminately or tossed out the door, unprepared and frightened to anyone.
Kismet, one year old, should have had her life ahead of her, and her finder thought she did when he took her to MCAS, mistakenly believing that MCAS is a shelter, not a disposal and culling site for unwanted animals. She was killed for shyness at the instruction of the MCAS managers’ Rounds Review whose professional failures and incompetence are routinely taken out on vulnerable dogs. Never once, given their inadequate qualifications and complete lack of knowledge about animal behavior science and training, do they think about contacting community experts who would help.
On November 27, 2024, a stray was turned into MCAS after being found on Halsey Street in Fairview by a Good Samaritan who had named her Kismet (based off “Kiss”).
He had kept her for over 24 hours, but less than 7 days and checked boxes that she had been an indoor only dog, was easy going, playful and shy greeting strangers; playful, easy going and shy when left alone or crated; playful and shy over house and litter box training. With regard to other animals she was listed as afraid of meeting new dogs, playful with known dogs, easy going with new cats; shy with known cats. Kismet was also described as playful, easy going and very loving towards children under 10 years old.
Why was she killed on December 6, 2024, 9 days later, marked “Unhealthy and Untreatable” when strangers found her easy, safe and loving?
Kismet encountered a hostile, impatient, and toxic agency that did not have time for her, so they killed her and misrepresented the disposition reason.
December 5, 2024,
“Rounds discussed and will move to humane euthanasia due to behavior in shelter and inability to handle.”
The behavior in question at MCAS is theirs.
First, Kismet’s conduct in the world outside was friendly and joyful. That was her baseline. At an agency operated by competent managers with integrity, the goal would be to directly address what was making Kismet avoidant and fearful at MCAS. The only tool at MCAS is copious amounts of psychotropic medication prescribed by veterinary assistants and technicians checked off by agency veterinarians.
On November 29, 2 days after admission, a veterinary assistant prescribed 150 mg of trazodone twice daily; on December 1, 300 mg of gabapentin was added twice daily; and on December 2, the trazodone dosage was increased to 200 mg twice daily. Nothing else was included to address the terror that Kismet was feeling. Furthermore on December 2, animal care notes recorded Kismet had not been eating the prescribed medication.
No or irregular training causes skill disparities in staff
The shelter’s lack of formal and consistent dog handling training for staff has been an official problem ever since it was reported in the agency’s 2016 audit, in the followup 2018 audit, and in its recent 2024 audit.
In the 2016 audit, less than half of staff had received any training at all on how to comprehend signals to animal behaviors let alone how to humanely handle them at all.
In the followup audit in 2018, the shelter did not meaningfully address this failure. Sure, they did some training for existing staff in 2016 following the audit, but they have not repeated this training for new staff since. They had not yet begun to make a plan to develop a training program.
In the recent 2024 audit, management still doesn’t have a training program. They claimed that it had been “delayed” due to a wider training initiative within the Department of Community Services. The report also mentions that there are “plans” for training in place, but several staff had indicated that there was still no formal dog behavior training. Worse, the only training they received was through watching videos.
A “delay” that has lasted 6 years is not a delay. For 8 years, there has been no formal training, aside from bursts so occasional they come off as a reaction to their lack of formal training being called out. Trainers and diplomates from the community have repeatedly reached out to help the shelter provide regular and meaningful training to staff. Every time, they are met with silence, outright rejection, or nominal acceptance by way of an inconsistent burst of training for existing staff that is not repeated or incorporated into a formal training program. No reasonable person can assess this to be anything short of intentional institutional indifference.
These inconsistencies are why the “behavior notes” in animal records can paint a very different picture regarding an animal’s relative ‘treatability.’ Some staffers coincidentally have more experience in handling stressed out animals than others, as is seen in Kismet’s behavior notes between two different staffers on two different days. On December 2, one staffer’s report indicated that they approached Kismet with a relatively relaxed and disarming demeanor. Another staffer, a day later, directly stared down and was confrontational with Kismet, which earned them her growling and lunging at them.
On December 2, the data collection notes read:
“Kismet has not lunged and snarled at me since taking her meds (was able to get her to take meds late this morning using liver. Mostly trembling on bed, barking when you approach. Will still retreat at time [sic]. If the kennels are quiet she will slowly approach me and take treats, keeps her distance when the barking is loud. Ears down, trembling. I continued to treat her throughout the day. She was less inclined to approach me later in the day, she kept her distance but did growl, just a few hollow barks.
At one point during the afternoon I had the door cracked open and she came over and ate treats near the door. I was not facing the right way to attempt to slip leash her, but she stayed near the door and sniffed the opening. When I moved to attempt to let her smell the leash or leash her she retreated outside, trembling and gave a couple of barks.
Note: There have been improvements to behavior, but delay due to her not eating meds and high FAS [Fear, anxiety and stress].”
On December 3, 2024, another staffer’s data collection notes:
“Attempted to interact with dog a few times throughout the day. She would retreat with ears back, head low, tail tucked, low growling. If I looked towards her, and remained close to kennel she would bark sharply, sometimes accompanied by a lift lip, or small single step lunge forward. Once I looked away she would continue to grumble and retreat inside, laying down on bed. She trembled hard and throughout all interactions, and most of the time I interacted she would retreat inside and avoid.”
A major stressor appears to have been the very loud noise in the kennels dogs are forced to endure. A stressor that the Association of Shelter Veterinarians has already assessed as being harmful to shelter animals in their report,Guidelines for Standards of Care in Animal Shelters (Section 13, Noise Exposure). Standards that Shelter Director Erin Grahek claims she follows. A claim made without any animal shelter experience, but with the promise that she’ll make up for it by following the leadership of shelter managers. Whether those same managers are central to the long-standing institutional failures at the shelter, aside.
There was no plan to mitigate the noise or even ask the finder to help move her to a quieter location.
Staff are not trained in ways to humanely manage distressed dogs. The management leaves them with a kit consisting of: Pet Corrector, Shaker cans, advice on how to shout commands loudly, and when all else fails, how to use the most force they can in an attempt to trap and subdue animals. A kit that is in complete opposition to what they were supposed to work on in that first audit from 2016: how to humanely handle animals with the least amount of force necessary.
Plans for handling animals are not created beyond ‘observe several times then kill as a solution.’ This is the very definition of lethal incompetence. Nothing is done to make the environment more hospitable. Managers ignore the kennels as they sit enclosed in their offices.
This is not a shelter. Dogs do not deserve to die this way. Workers do not deserve to be traumatized because their efforts to save lives end in needless killing where all that matters is the management’s schedule: ‘The trains have to run on time.’
Buffy, ID# 329918 and Walker, ID# 329916 Puppy, ID# 330764 and ID# 330766
MCAS holds others to minimum standards of care that they themselves fail to meet. Unlike many in the demographic they serve, they have not the excuse of poverty. They have done nothing to improve MCAS’ unsafe toxic environment where stress is normalized and infectious contagious diseases continue to be rampant and unchecked. Citizens are cited for deprivation of proper care. MCAS is given a “free pass” by those charged with oversight.
The story of Buffy, Walker and eight puppies born at MCAS is just one among many examples concerning deprivation of proper care.
Buffy and her partner Walker belong to a homeless person living in his truck. Both Buffy and Walker were found alone in a fenced yard by the renter living there on November 20, 2024. The records at the time noted that Buffy appeared to be pregnant and Walker had a left shoulder injury. MCAS impounded both dogs, placing them under “protective custody,” “due to concerns of either suspected neglect or concerns on care of pet.”
On November 26, MCAS spoke to Buffy and Walker’s homeless owner who explained he had been ill and had asked the person on the property, the renter whom he knew, if he could temporarily care of them. The renter confirmed that he knew the owner of Buffy and Walker, but had not agreed to caretaking responsibilities.
Buffy, known to be likely pregnant from her impound notes, did not go through the standard intake process the day she arrived at MCAS. Her puppies were born on November 22, 2024 while she was held in protective custody. This happened in the general intake kennels, an unsafe area, where temperatures are erratic, contagious disease is rampant, and oversight is lacking.
After the birth of the puppies, there was no attempt to move them to the shelter hospital or any safer area. How many puppies were born is unclear: 8 puppies are listed in Buffy’s medical report, only 6 puppies are listed with MCAS identification numbers on November 22, 2024 Intake Found Reports. One sequential number 330767 is missing without explanation: 330763, 330764, 330765, 330766, 330768, 330769.
Medical follow up
Buffy was separately examined in the hospital away from her puppies by an onsite veterinarian on November 23, the day after the puppies were born. She was prescribed twice daily feedings for being “under-conditioned” and also prescribed medication for a chronic bilateral ear infection.
On the same day that Buffy was examined, veterinary assistants examined the puppies and described them as “apparently healthy.” The recommendation was that they should be fostered until weaned but the search for a foster was not permitted until Buffy’s bite quarantine ended on December 4, 2024, a minor bite that occurred while a worker cleaning kennels was moving dirty blankets around Buffy and the puppies on the morning of November 23, an activity that would have been best conducted while Buffy and the puppies were being medically examined because dogs’ maternal protective instincts are high around newborn puppies.
The bite was understandable, there were many ways to serve quarantine without risking disease to the newborn puppies, but blind enforcement rules trumped animal welfare. A creative solution intended to meet both concerns was too much trouble.
November 23 2024, Kennel cleaning that led to a minor bite to the worker
“During morning cleaning I entered Sally’s [Buffy’s] kennel to clean around her and her puppies. I started mopping around the whelping bed where they were all laying together, after the floor was mopped I left and returned with clean blankets, I started to peel back the dirty blankets around her slowly at first, she showed some signs of discomfort, slight tenseness of body, staring, and twitching nose, I stopped and reached out my hand to allow contact, she sniffed my hand and then turned back to her puppies.
I returned to slowly moving blankets around her and she again turned to look at me this time lunging at my face, open mouth contact was made and one of her teeth punctured my left cheek, afterwards she did not bite down and immediately pulled back and returned her attention to her babies. I stood up and left the kennel without further issue to notify the management.”
The “puncture” bite pictured above is very minor. The incident was caused by management negligence. They failed to train the worker. Workers are left to fend for themselves, making their own on the spot decisions. They are armed with pet corrector, radios, shake cans and spray water bottles. The worker was never trained on how to manage dogs, especially dogs protective of their new born offspring. Training is important. So is compassion and common sense about welfare. Buffy and her puppies should never have been left, their care abandoned, in general intake.
Four days after birth, on the morning of November 26, 2024, two of the puppies, 330766 and 330764 were found cold and unresponsive, deceased in the kennels.
No necropsies were ordered. The policy that has continued since 2017, by then Director Jackie Rose, leaves the order of necropsies for “unassisted deaths” up to management discretion. In this case Buffy, Walker, and the puppies were owned animals. They were not MCAS’ property. The puppies died while under MCAS care. Their deaths were unexpected, and the cause of death concerning, given the unsafe environment under which they were housed where in addition to poor temperature control, failed supervision, and disease rampancy.
All shelter animals are put at risk when unexplained deaths cannot be investigated via necropsy without the direct authorization of an uninterested management. Without proper investigation, causes of death cannot be identified, and all other animals are put at risk. The managers have given themselves a free pass from accountability by denying investigations. Animals’ lives are disposable property sent to the incinerator. They, the managers, are never going to elect an investigation that might reflect on their own conduct.
Aftermath
The owner spoke with managers on November 26, wanting to redeem his dogs and puppies. He was not charged with negligence. He was given a report of their impoundment at MCAS that did not allude to or admit to the deaths of two puppies. Yet those were his puppies, ironically in their protective custody. The agency forbade Buffy’s departure until after the end of her quarantine on December 4, 2024, leaving her and her puppies at risk for illness, without any explanation to the owner regarding why she had been quarantined at all.
The agency decided to monitor and ‘wait and see,’ instead of placing Buffy and the puppies in a safe environment. This leaves them at risk because kennel cough often progresses into pneumonia and is highly contagious. Let alone the agency’s historic failures with managing disease spread at the shelter.
November 30, 2024, veterinarian note following a check up,
“Monitor for progressing respiratory signs daily due to concern for puppies being exposed to kennel cough.”
November 27, 2024, Supervisor/Management notes; the day after the puppies died
“Spoke with AO [ Animal owner] … Discussed that a few of the puppies did not thrive in the shelter and if at any point after reclaim, the puppies are not doing well, to please bring them back to MCAS. Advised that we would not be able to guarantee reclaim at that point, but that we would be able to take them if needed. Advised that Buffy is on BQ and can be reclaimed on 12/4… jkt [Jennifer Turner, Field Services Supervisor.].”
The puppies who died did not “thrive” because they were deprived of proper care in an unsafe environment. To even describe the situation as a “failure to thrive” suggests a fundamental flaw in the moral values of the institution.
On December 2, 2024 the Field Services Supervisor offered the owner an ‘opportunity’ to surrender Buffy and the puppies, which he declined, noting he had help for the puppies and that a friend was driving from the East Coast to take Buffy. It is difficult for MCAS to claim any high moral ground.
The Field Services Supervisor continued,
“I told [Animal Owner] that we will consider this litter of puppies to be an accident. And that if he plans on “Buffy” having any more litters that he will need to get a breeding facility license. [Animal Owner] stated that it was an accident for her having puppies and that he is planning on getting her spayed. I gave [Animal Owner] the information of OHS low income Spay and Neuter Program.”
When MCAS management err they always move to one-upmanship as a show of superior authority in order to hide their errors in judgment. Why, when someone is homeless, advise them that if it happens again they will need to purchase a breeders’ facility license? Why not offer a free spay and neuter for Buffy and Walker instead?
MCAS current spay neuter voucher system based upon a “trust” that adopters will comply; a “trust” rooted in expediency. Given the high risk of non-compliance for voucher redemption, the borderline free gift ($25) of a ‘low fee’ ‘fertile animal’ should be accompanied by the required payment of a breeding facility license until proof of voucher redemption is provided. Otherwise redemption rates will remain low. Or they could return to past practices by securing a path of spaying/neutering animals on site before they are released to the adopter.
Referring low-income owners to OHS, as was done in this case, is off loading responsibilities that the shelter itself has funding for, funding that has been reported by the county’s auditor as being underused. That report showed that for the 5 years prior to mid-May 2023, the shelter only spent about $42,000 with about $316,00 left unspent in its Spay/Neuter Fund. In the 2024 followup report, the shelter has substantially increased its use of this fund, but “consideration of financial need was not a factor in the spaying or neutering of these animals.” An abdication of the intent behind the program to support low-income adopters in order to ‘comply’ with recommendations. MCAS can afford to spay Buffy; her owner cannot. MCAS’ mission is a vacant promise.
As of December 1, 2024 public records, Buffy and her puppies were still in Intake Kennel 9 at MCAS in the general population. MCAS still fails to give workers the training necessary for their daily interactions with shelter animals. This training is especially needed given these animals are often subjected to environmental stress. The workers are on the front lines. That management’s abdication in providing training should be held to account.
Failure to investigate unexplained deaths has happened before. In the linked Oregonian article, LeeLoo survived with emergency care, but another dog, Bear (ID# 297341), did not. Bear was a one and a half year old gentle and playful Labrador Retriever adopted from MCAS in ostensibly good health on October 13, 2024. On October 14, the adopter noted that he seemed unwell, then on the 15th, they called a veterinarian for advice. The veterinarian recommended that the adopter keep watch on Bear. Bear collapsed and died suddenly that evening. MCAS offered condolences and were willing to cover the costs for a private cremation, paw print and pickup. However, they completely neglected to offer paying for a necropsy to study why Bear, a young, supposedly healthy dog, suddenly suffered from lethargy and loss of appetite rapidly deteriorating into collapse and then death a day after he was adopted.
One year later nothing has changed. Managers are given too much discretionary power without oversight to develop policies that are not reviewed by anyone else in government. When dogs die “unassisted deaths” they make note of the occurrence for statistical data keeping, and promptly move on. There is no interest in discovering causes, just as there is no interest in treatment.
Prioritizing an efficiency defined by speed has been the primary motivation for this shelter. Whether that’s in the establishment of the spay/neuter voucher program, where “the change was intended to move pets out of the shelter faster,” or in minimum qualifications for hiring animal care and veterinary leadership positions in order to “quickly fill vacant roles,” according to MCAS Director Erin Grahek’s own words in an article by April Ehrlich on Oregon Public Broadcasting (OPB).
The February 2023 investigative report by OPB April Ehrlich, addressing MCAS’ failures could be published today. A year and a half later there has been no substantive change.
“In a 2018 report, auditors noted that multiple staff were concerned the shelter had adopted out unsafe dogs.”
MCAS does not adopt out “unsafe dogs.”They adopt dogs out unsafely because of bad policies that disregard animal welfare, including low standards and $25 adoptions, when ‘cheap’ is an invitation to impulse buys. Markdowns are intended as incentives. When ‘discount specials’ never end, save changing their name, that speaks to the agency’s failure and the corruption of its values.
Adoptions: How adoptions go wrong.
Over the protests of staff and volunteers, Jasmin, a wonderful dog whose history included a severe attack by another dog, was to have an adoption restriction requiring that she be the only dog in the prospective family. Instead, management overrode that restriction and adopted Jasmin to a family with another resident dog. Days later she was returned by the family after a dog attack. MCAS managers killed her for their careless indifference. The practice of facilitating poor adoptions and killing dogs who have been sent to unsafe homes and returned happens all of the time.
Playgroups: What was intended to relieve the stress of constant confinement after working with Dogs Playing for Life, has been repurposed into an evaluation about adoptability based upon ‘observed’ social skills in the play group, filtering out dogs that, in their assessment, can’t be adopted and so should be euthanized.
This test is deeply flawed because of the debilitatingly stressful environment fostered by this shelter’s management policies. Dogs known to be reactive to other dogs are included in playgroup tests, often muzzled, increasing their anxiety and fear. Playgroups include dogs in heat, injured dogs, dogs suffering kennel cough, disabled, blind, and deaf dogs, diagnostic categories whose illness or vulnerabilities place them at risk.
Intake: Dogs are rushed through intake regardless of their levels of distress, a process forced by the management’s edict for speed efficiency. If distressed, they are attached by leash to an i-hook, escalating fear and anxiety by trapping them, and then the intrusive exams proceed. They are then labeled with ‘handling sensitivity’ and/or ‘fear’ or ‘jumpy/mouthy’ waivers for defensive reactions brought about by insensitive handling. For example, if they “head whip” when intrusive exams are conducted. When staff behaves insensitively, on the orders of management, the dogs are blamed for their reactions. Everything becomes the dog’s fault.
Data Collection: “Data collections” are visits to kenneled dogs, usually but not always up to 3, to evaluate how many personal space intrusions, including checking teeth, ears, and physically checking spay/neuter status, a dog will tolerate from a complete stranger in a shelter environment. Staff are not trained about animal behavior, how to recognize stress and how to gain safe compliance for physical exams. The emphasis is always on speed. Pushing dogs down or pursuing them to leash is unsafe conduct. The only tools management provides are negative: The word “No”; Pet Corrector, spray bottles and shake cans all of which can backfire by escalating stress.
Fosters: Are not screened, except to make sure their companion animals are licensed, and chosen randomly. They receive no training and are not provided behavior training resources. The absence of professional guidance creates safety risks. If an incident occurs it is again the dog’s fault according to managers, not their own poor policies.
Adoption Returns: Adoption Returns are commonplace because of poor and indifferent adoption standards. Only the dog pays the price.
“Multnomah County shelter has a policy to offer emergency boarding services for up to a month.”
Director Erin Grahek and Operations Manager Marian Cannell ended emergency board and respite fosters a while ago without announcement, excusing this with the statement that they have insufficient space. ‘Space’ is a matter of creativity. Respite fostering and emergency board have been replaced by the ‘ 6 day hold mandatory’ for owned animals, after which MCAS assumes ownership.
Redemption and retention are their funded missions. When one lacks the skills to honor it, one does not just get rid of the mission. MCAS accommodated for respite and emergency board in the past despite an equal or greater intake, smaller budget and fewer managers. What did previous directors do differently when space was available? The funding is there. The imagination, will, initiative, and values are not.
Attached is a proposed respite foster program County Chair Jessica Vega Pederson placed on a short list over a year ago. Why hasn’t it been funded? Other space limitations are the result of multiple adoption returns, as many as 6 times in one case.
Owner surrenders outside the scope of those that the county is mandated to take are often about owners’ deficits and mismanagement. Issues that could be managed by providing counseling before accepting a surrender, as former Multnomah County Animal Control Director Hank Miggins once required.
There is no veterinary social work position to proactively help people keep their animals when a crisis occurs. Frequent adoption returns and high intake from owner surrenders are challenges that should be met with policy change, but the management instead chooses to prioritize speedy intake with speedy adoption to create space.
“‘I will bring on strong professionals who have the animal welfare background that I don’t, and marry that with my experience as a manager and a leader in Multnomah County,’ Erin Grahek said.”
That program has failed completely. First, a leader must know the difference between competent effective sheltering and poor sheltering. A distinction that is not learned from following the managers’ lead. It has to come from a director’s lived professional experience or they will not be able to lead, and instead be relegated to a director in title only. Operations manager, Marian Cannell hired in November 2022, and the supervisory managers demonstrably lack the skills and background necessary to run a humane progressive animal shelter that meets this community’s needs. Management positions have been filled based not upon skills proficiency and a broad-based search, but upon personal loyalty to existing management.
The community and homeless animals bear the costs of government failure. The February 2023 report from OPB April Erhlich could just as well be today’s report.
Service to managers is more important than serving the community, what is really needed to return service to the community is a system of accountability.
Gail O’Connell-Babcock
Jason Renaud’s Respite Program proposal from September 2022
