OK, now for the real nitty gritty on why BB wants to become the Licensing Queen all of a sudden. She and "Sleazy" Salazar are threatening the officers with jobs and revenue. Of course, its not really a quota. Now it's a "goal" of 70 licenses a week each with a daily report to BB on exactly how many each officer sells for the next 3 to 6 months pilot program and instructions to ignore everything else animal-related. All the other things that hurt animals or cause suffering or endanger humans are called "peripheral". That's things like neglect, roaming or aggressive dogs, short chains, no water, shelter or shade in the rain or hot summer --anything that isn't an emergency call or exigent is to be ignored. And we all know exigent means almost dying. Tell me, folks, does this program have sustainability? This is her new program that she hopes will save her own job. Where did you get your humane training, BB" And where are you going to get these officers without taking them off their duties protecting animals and people?
Why not tell the truth, that the Council isn't as gullible as you hoped and you and your breeder buddies aren't as clever as you thought. They want to know what you've been doing about licensing since you've been here. Oh, oh, panic time! You thought you'd come to LA and pull the same BS you did in Seattle. According to stats, dog licenses are down about 15,000 since you've been GM. that's only seven months! So the City Council decided to take a look at what you are doing (not doing) and for the first time in LA, make you earn money to maintain the spay and neuter fund. Whoa, you thought because of your friends Rosendahl and Koretz that you'd have a free ride.
Well, looks like Rose is on to you finally. He signed a motion by Cardenas that will make you show what you've been doing for the past seven months, so you are in a hurry to play catch up at the expense of the abused, injured, neglected and abandoned animals in LA. You never even instructed officers to do licensing at all when they were on regular calls until now. So, LAAS has both a GM and a Field Operations Director who have never done a licensing program before and it shows. OK, employees, here's the real reason you are being told to busy your butts and bring in the bucks. It's not to save your jobs like you were told, it's to save Barnette and Salazar's jobs. Take a look.
"I THEREFORE MOVE, that the Animal Services Department, with the assistance of the CAO, be instructed to report within 30 days with recommendations relative to implementing an annual cap on the amount of dog licensing revenue deposited into the General Fund based on TY 09-10 amounts, with any increased revenue collected above that amount being deposited into the Animal Spay and Neuter Trust Fund.
I FURTHER MOVE that the Animal Services Department be instructed to report on the annual number of dog licenses issued for the current Fiscal Year 2010-11 and the previous five years."
Do you think this was an order by Council to do nothing but dog licensing until July and let the animals suffer? I don't think so. Is this the great licensing plan you told Council you are developed with Found Animals and Best Friends? Has either one of them ever done licensing? Doesn't sound like it. Where are all the notices to dog owners so they won't just relinquish dogs when a uniformed officer bangs on their door and tells them they need a license NOW? What about spaying or neutering first? That isn't in your plan. Isn't it true they will be told to just pay and get the license even if the dogs don't have rabies shots, aren't altered and they don't have a breeders permit--because all you want is numbers to show the Council in 30 days?
Then who's gonna follow up on this and straighten out this mess? Didn't you tell the press that more animals will be euthanized because there's not enough employees to even staff all shelters? If you were really interested in licensing revenue to save the shelters and spay/neuter, why did you take them both off the LAAS webpage? When you were told by a councilman to put them back, you put up five words. Doesn't look like a priority to me.
Let's take a look at where you were planning to take LAAS based on your history as a breeder with a daughter who is also a breeder. And let's not forget you were the AKC legislative rep for Seattle until seven months ago and you are still sending dogs to Seattle Humane Society. Has anyone check to see if LAAS is still paying for the spay or neuter of those transported dogs. According to reports SHS is getting a lions share of lap dogs and is also getting filled up with LA pit bulls so that BB's adoption rate will look good and she won't have to euthanize them here. Is that why they are holding her job open? A little inhouse politics? Better keep it open SHS.
C'mon BB, you can tell us. Wasn't your plan to just let the licensing slide down hill and blame it on the $100 unaltered license fee and the breeder permit requirement passed by the Council? Haven't you been working up to saying that other agencies charge less for unaltered dogs and get more revenue that way--the buzz word is you get more dogs "in the system." Isn't that why you want to change the ordinance so that license late fees are only a piddling 25% instead of 100%? That's $5 for late altered dog licenses. Is that gonna get them to pay on time? What you really want is for your breeder buddies to not have to pay $100 each for dogs that make them untaxed money at home. And you definitely don't want the city to know how many they have in crates and garages churning out puppies that make them rich. You opposed puppy mill legislation in Washington. You sure don't want to stop breeding in Los Angeles. http://workingtohelpanimalstodaytomorrow.blogspot.com/2010/06/more-on-barnette.html
So, wasn't your real goal to destroy the Los Angeles spay/neuter ordinance, along with your friend Cathie Turner by telling the council that the $100 unaltered dog license is the reason people aren't licensing their dogs? Of course you weren't going to mention that impounds have decreased about one-half since that differential went into effect because it is an incentive for people to spay/neuter. You weren't gonna tell them that the reason there are less unaltered licenses is because people are fixing their pets. And the reason there aren't more altered licenses is because you don't have a licensing plan and because you are sending lots of the animals which are altered in LA shelters out of state.
So here's the bottom line. The March 30 BBD (Barnette Blueprint for Disaster) kickoff is postponed. So what are we going to do, a media blitz to cover that you overlooked notifying the public in your panic? Then next week LAAS officers whose job is to correct inhumane conditions and protect animals will become license canvassers with a goal-quota for each week to save your job. Maybe you can bully them a little harder to do more than 70 cause you gotta catch up fast. I hear bullying is something Mark Salazar does best. I also heard it cost Riverside a bundle to pay off the lawsuits for what he did to employees. But that didn't bother you, you hired him anyway and LA is used to paying off lawsuits for wrong conduct in LAAS so maybe it's no big deal. And BB says she doesn't believe in City rules and policy anyway. Looks like she makes it up as she goes along, since she ordered LAAS officers to turn their back on laws and conditions of animals and ONLY focus on LICENSING REVENUE. Suddenly it's down and dirty, just grab the money and run, ACO's. Sounds more like a madam at a brothel than a city manager trying to promote good animal care.