I've been following this particular situation in LA for awhile. As we all cried about, Brenda Barnette was hired in the City of LA.
and the list goes on, just do a search for Barnette on this very blog and you'll see. I have many postings about her from Seattle/King County as well. Also look under ACO Guild, those postings tell a tale about this woman.
Now I ask you, does this make sense? Barnette is asking for an increase in the household pet limits, a 66% increase if you do the math. Please. You've got over 10 million people in LA. High cost of living and a low income level. It is estimated that only 10% of the dogs are licensed. And Barnette wants to increase limits??? She is being supported by two city council members, Koretz and Rosendahl. Both admit they want to have more animals. Rosendahl has admitted to breeding. And we all know Barnette's background as a breeder, and legislative rep for the AKC. Now what does this sound like to you?
Worse yet, looking at Barnette's report that is posted on line and looking at the motion that was passed by the LAAS Commission, there's something very "fishy" going on. Why is there a small (but very mighty) addition to the motion that isn't in the report and it isn't listed on the agenda item description? HERE IT IS: is. They approved changing the definition of dog and cat kennels to not start until there are six dogs or six cats (has always been four dogs or four cats), but it looks like Barnette added: EXCLUDING ANIMALS IN TEMPORARY FOSTER CARE.
So what the hell does she mean--you can have UNLIMITED temporary foster care animals (no definition of any of those words, of course)? Or does it mean that if you have temporary foster animals, you can only have three and can't increase to five? Based on her big announcement about fostering in bathrooms, basements and garages, doesn't this seem like she believes she's entitled to UNLIMITED ANIMALS if they are just called "temporary fosters"??? Does that apply to all the breeders who don't sell their pups right away? If they are under four months they are puppies, but if they are over four months they are FOSTERS? I read the numerous letters written to the Council from breeders. http://cityclerk.lacity.org/lacityclerkconnect/index.cfm?fa=ccfi.viewrecord&cfnumber=10-0982 Of course they want it. What about the rest of us, that don't feel safe walking our dogs down the street as it is?
So okay, here's the punch line. Now she is complaining of the overcrowding of the shelters and begging for 12,000 foster homes. Is this not a hoot? Is there anyone out there that can explain this sort of mentality? It is the "No Kill" mentality and it makes no sense.
Read this shit. If you have an extra bathroom??? No mention of training. Nothing. What is going through this person's head? I'll tell you what, their Messiah, their false prophet, "No Kill". Then if she gets these 12,000 homes, she will make herself look good on paper by counting them in her "live release numbers". This is getting ridiculous.
And of note on this article, a comment was made of her hiring someone who headed a humane society with an 80% euthanization rate. I bet she overlooked experience people right here in LA to do that. Sounds like this new hire was a dumbass and he will bow down to her for saving him. Her vet with the Seattle Humane Society was caught prescribing medication to himself in the name of his dead dog. She is connected with Kim Sgro, that's another one involved in dirt. Barnette surrounds herself with the scum of the humane community. She either does that on purpose or she has very poor judgement. Barnette is a control freak without a doubt. You can read all about her being one on this very blog.