Sunday, March 27, 2011


BB, when will you learn what you can and can't do in government? Or at least ask first? There it is. Big as life, Rachel Weil’s name right under the City Seal. A woman who calls herself a public relations firm (but doesn’t seem to have a website) with her name and phone number as contact, right under the LA City seal and the LA Animal Services logo. Did you get permission to let RW advertise for free just because she cleans up your bad spelling and grammar, BB? Government agencies don’t allow a private company to "advertise" by placing their name on official city documents and especially not under the City Seal. That’s how Boks got in trouble with his famous Hooters fiasco. Sure the pictures he used were inappropriate. But Hooters had a right to put on a benefit for the shelters. Boks screwed up just like you by putting out their advertisement under the City seal and the LAAS logo. That's what the council and the controller went crazy over. He got in a lot of trouble over this one. And you should too. If everybody could get their name up as an official City contact just by donating a few hours to save the job of a GM who can’t spell or write, the City could have liability for a whole string of unemployed publicists. That means every time the media or the public contacts Rachel Weil at her 818 phone number because her name is on a City adoption event news release, she gets a free lead! For my readers not working for government, the City may allow some donors to put "we support LAAS" signs in the shelters if they make a BIG donation like food or flea products for instance. That's it. They cannot put their name under the City seal to indicate that the City endorses them or recommends them because that could make the City liable bigtime if there’s a problem for somebody who believes the city’s approval guarantees the product is safe. Once again BB is not careful about her "friends" or is she just desperate to have a friend. The link below from Weil shows she was contracted to SEAACA in December 2010. But now it is March and she is no longer representing SEAACA. What happened to this short lived contract? I could venture a guess based on rumors that it was not a friendly departure, but I won't. You can check it out for yourself. BB seems to forget she is now part of the government, not an independent operator. Get this through your head, Brenda Barnette, you are no longer working for a private agency. You’re slurping up a lot of dollars from taxpayers who don’t even have jobs. Your using up revenue that could have kept city employees from being laid off. They have a right to expect YOU to do your job. Looks like you have to rely on outsiders to even do the basics. You disgust me. This is just one. Stay tuned folks, the BIG ONE is coming!


Anonymous said...

Is this this Rachel Weil?


Perhaps a friend or relative of Winograd?

Rick Berman also uses a lot of these small time "public relations" people to do things like promote the Ringling Brothers circus for the owners that have been busted multiple times for animal cruelty

NAIA, one of Barnette's groups, (run by AKC board member) Patti Strand has an employee of Ringling Brothers on the board of her off-shoot AKC lobbying group.

HonestyHelps said...

Anon:28, that link isn't working for me. linkedin does show her when you do a search. She does have a public relations business in LA.

Weil also claims to be a rescuer in LA.

Anonymous said...

It always sucks when people use the animals to promote their businesses.

Why the hell do they do this?

if they are going to do charity, do it but don't promote a business. It's sleazy.

Of course I am assuming here. Weil may be getting paid for this. That would be ultra low to take money away from the animals, and in a city where city employees are getting laid off.

I've seen her "pr work." I'm not impressed. Any volunteer could do it, maybe a lot better.

If she IS volunteering, I'll tell you why she is doing it in the name of her business and putting her business name on everything (in addition to using the city to get free advertising)

Average person can donate time to charity and not get a tax deduction. Business owner does and gets a tax cut.

If I were the IRS and that is what was going on, I'd want to know why there is a tax deduction claim for non-specialized "work" that a high school kid could do.

This is all so sleazy. Honestly, it is no wonder that things never get better for the animals.

Anonymous said...

This is really just not ok.

These brief little entries that a school kid could do, but look at her BIG AD at the end for her business, and the big personal brag. It's bigger than most of the pet entries.

This isn't charity. It's just using the animals to make a buck and get free advertising.

I am so sick of this freeloading. It just happens so much. Meanwhile the ones REALLY doing the charity are busting their butts and don't get even the slightest acknowledgement, and no plugs for their personal businesses. They have too much dignity to do it!

And if Rachel cares about animals, why is she involved with a puppy mill lobbyist refusing to investigate cruelty or do anything about it, and a NAIA drone?

There comes a time for personal dignity. Shilling for one's business at the expense of the animals SUCKS.


Anonymous said...

This is REALLY disgusting. She's also using shelter animals to get free advertising for HER CLIENT'S businesses.

She sells her "services" to really expensive vet clinics.

look at this. Brief little nothings about a few pets, a kid could do better, fake charity, then a big ADVERTISEMENT from one of her expensive vet clients at the end, pretending to be part of the article.


She must be offering these vets free ads hidden in fake charity "articles" that she "volunteers" to write and professes to be "helping" animals.

Well, the ad for her client the vet isn't marked advertising!

This is not ok. Using shelter animals to get free advertising for rich people's businesses is NOT ok.

Does this vet do some free spay neuters? The prices these vets charge is off the wall high.

She also does pr for some incredibly expensive vet referral and specialty hospital. Low income and poor, don't even dream that you can afford what they charge!

Are these people doing free spays and neuters for the indigent? For the shelter system?

Uh, NO!!

Anonymous said...

Here is the story in a nutshell.

This is one of Rachel's clients. If you are poor or lower income, or running a rescue on a shoestring, FORGET IT! You are not welcome. You can't afford it.

And are they worried about all the homeless in the shelters?

Rachel Weil, if you really care about animals, why aren't you getting your rich clients to do free spays, neuters, and treatments for the shelter animals instead of using shelter animals to promote your clients?


These places are BIG BUCKS!!

Now see what their clients say (and this is just some of the complaints)

"A bottle of digoxin they charged me 90+ dollars is only 22 dollars at a local pharmacy.

they said maximum I would have to pay is 1700 dollars but I ended up paying 2300 dollars.

Looking back, I just feel completely cheated but I had to at the time because I was hysterical at the thought of losing my baby.

They prey on soft-hearted animal loving suckers like myself. Despicable if you asked me. Be aware."

" the senior staff at ASEC seemed more concerned with racking up expensive diagnostic fees then listening to a junior vet who could solve the problem quickly and efficiently."

"Avoid at all costs... Took my cat here in the middle of the night for what should have been a relatively routine broken leg. My jaw dropped when I was told my choices were to either a) have them do surgery on the cat for 4,500.. or to splint and put a cast on the leg for around 900.00. I decided on the later.

Two hours later, my cat came out of the emergency room with a ginormous cast, which the cat was unable to walk on. The vet told me kitty would get used to it and should be walking the next day. However once I got home, it was clear there was no way she would be able to walk on the cast.... ever.

I took my cat to her regular vet that day. He agreed that the cast they put on was not done properly. He took new X-rays and put on a new, smaller cast that would allow the cat to walk and also let the leg heal. Total cost: a very reasonable 140.00.

What's so offensive about this whole experience at ASEC--other than the incompetence of the vet--is that ASEC knows when you bring in a suffering animal at midnight, they've got you over a barrel. You have no choice but to pay what they want, and there's no way to shop around for a decent vet. They clearly take advantage of the fact that there's no other facility available in the middle of the night. And while I understand paying a premium for 24 hour care, charging hundreds or thousands more than a regular vet is unconscionable."

HonestyHelps said...

There's a lot of dirt in the humane community. It's always attracted these deviants.

Anonymous said...

What kind of pr person works for people like this? How does someone sleep at night if they "love animals" and are "trying to help them" and are doing pr for this kind of deal?

Anonymous said...

How about arranging special RESCUE rates at that million dollar vet hospital for ALL rescue, Rachel Weil?

They could be doing some 10 dollar spays for real rescue people and take a tax deduction.

THAT'S helping animals, not getting free ads in city shelter press releases for a puppy mill lobbyist who won't bust animal abusers so the AKC will be happy.

Anonymous said...

This is an aside but related and really important

In veterinary medicine there are the good guys and the bad guys

A good guy wrote a book on how the bad guys price gouge, run up bills with unnecessary but expensive tests, overchrge wildly, and otherwise commit what some might call fraud to get rich.

Animals get screwed again.

this vet is retired and he said screw it, the bad vets will get pissed off at him, but too bad, it's wrong for them to be doing these things and it hurts animals

If you go to Amazon, you can read some pages of the book


This is the kind of "disruption" that Winograd should be engaged in- exposing the rich parasites that have been feeding off animals for years and enabling the suffering and turning a blind eye to it. People can't frigging afford to take care of their pets, Winograd, or spay and neuter them, because the proliferation of greedy vets has priced most people out of affordable vet care.

Then they have to give their pets up or let them breed, Winograd!

But Winograd wants to blame the shelters for the problems caused by RICH PEOPLE.

Of course, the RICH people give money to people who blame the shelters and the ones trying to clean up after the mess that rich people have created or do nothing about

HonestyHelps said...

I've said for years that if you can't afford the maintenance on a pet, don't get one. Vets are pricing themselves out of business actually.

Then you have "rescues" like Lori Weise who pimps dogs to the homeless, like they can really afford a vet when the pet needs it. She just makes for more suffering by doing this.

Anonymous said...

This Rachel Weil chick seems like a real loser. Using these animals to leverage low level PR for her wealthy clients. I have a friend who's brother dated her and said all she cares about is being around celebrities and that she has herpes. Gross!!!!