This article set me off this morning. I knew that these nonprofit shelters in Delaware were trying to screw over the cities and counties. I want to explain how this works.
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/front_page/20101101_Shelters__new_rules_on_strays_have_towns_scrambling.html
Seems the latest tactic is to "blackmail" cities and counties and force the "No Kill" philosophy onto them. Withdraw services, knowing full well that these cities have depended on these nonprofit shelters for years and years to take their strays. They know that the cities don't have their own shelter and in this economy, the cities can't afford to build a new shelter. So the nonprofits are threatening to withdraw. What are the cities to do other than accept and pay for the "No Kill" philosophy or the animals will run wild in the streets.
"Plus, nonprofit shelters find it easier to get donations if they call themselves "no kill."
All about the money.
""And then there is the toll that euthanasia takes on staffers.
Karel Minor remembers the days his employees at the Humane Society of Berks County would be sobbing in corners after they had to euthanize more than 100 healthy cats in one day just to make room for more strays.
"I can't ask the staff to go back to that. It is just not right," said Minor, executive director. The shelter dropped animal-control contracts from the state and municipalities in 2008.""
Maybe those staffers would feel better picking up the dead ones off the road, or the ones starved to death in a foreclosed home, or the ones pucking their guts out from poison. They should be forced to do that so they would realize that what they are doing is much more humane. When these staffers see a dead dog or cat on the roadway, they can thank themselves for being the cowards they are and accept that it is there because of their actions.
Just imagine a poor dog or cat lying in the roadway, can't move from the injuries, just waiting for the next car to end the suffering. Picture the dog or cat waiting by the door for the master than never returns, dying a long and lingering death from starvation. This is what these shelters want to happen because they have to know what their decision to take a philosophy over reality does to animals. These aren't humane people, these are the despicable. This is what "No Kill" is creating, a monster. They should be condemned not praised.
THERE ARE FAR WORSE THINGS THAT CAN HAPPEN TO ANIMALS THAN BEING EUTHANIZED IN SHELTERS, FAR WORSE. And "No Kill" supports all of those worse things.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Deficits, Deficits, Who Has Deficits? Part 2
Check out Guidestar, Nevada Humane Society is not showing an 09 tax return yet. So looking at the 08 it seems Nevada Humane pays more for employees than they invest in the animals. According to Guidestar employees salaries were $1.755,663 and their donations for 08 were $2,908,082. Interesting is their investment income dropped dramatically from $781,803 in 07 to MINUS $217,302. They only made a little over a $1000 with their fundraising events. And their net revenue was a whopping loss at $216,267. But they are busy on publically traded securities at almost $3 million. Like to play the stock market? Looks like they are running a deficit as well for 08 of $217,302.
I'm no accountant but NHS's tax return looks a little funny to me. Can shelters really afford to install Winograd's program? It's beginning to look like they can't.
I'm no accountant but NHS's tax return looks a little funny to me. Can shelters really afford to install Winograd's program? It's beginning to look like they can't.
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Deficits, Deficits Who Has Deficits?
Does being "No Kill" lead to disaster for a shelter? Obviously it does. Animal Ark aka Mike Fry, another infamous Whinonette along with Brent Toellner is running his shelter into the ground trying to make "No Kill" work. Now, one would think that since he features Nathan Winograd on his so called radio show every week that the donations would pour in. I mean, aren't these guys saying that "No Kill" is on a roll, sweeping the nation, blah, blah, blah. So one would think that the donations would be sweeping too, right?
Wrong. Here is the status of this "No Kill" shelter.
http://www.ag.state.mn.us/charities/SearchResults2.asp?Fed=411311053&Yr=CURR&cmdSearch=Submit
Organization Name FRIENDS OF ANIMAL ADOPTIONS, INC. D/B/A ANIMAL ARK
Federal ID# 411311053
For Fiscal Year Ending 8/31/2009
Income
Direct Public Support $508,228
Government Grants $0
Other Revenue $337,711
Total Revenue $845,939
Expenses
Amount Spent for Program or Charitable Purposes $831,978
Management/General Expense $144,878
Fundraising Expense $53,595
Total Expenses $1,030,451
Excess/Deficit $-184,512
Total Assets $937,636
Total Liabilities $522,056
End of Year Fund Bal/Net Worth $415,580
Wait, there's more. Since the year before their donations dropped dramatically. They better get the Whino off the radio show it looks like.
Organization Name FRIENDS OF ANIMAL ADOPTIONS, INC. D/B/A ANIMAL ARK
Federal ID# 411311053
For Fiscal Year Ending 8/31/2008
Income
Direct Public Support $786,232
Government Grants $0
Other Revenue $312,631
Total Revenue $1,098,863
Expenses
Amount Spent for Program or Charitable Purposes $941,401
Management/General Expense $122,802
Fundraising Expense $24,431
Total Expenses $1,088,634
Excess/Deficit $10,229
Total Assets $1,067,694
Total Liabilities $467,602
End of Year Fund Bal/Net Worth $600,092
Wow, can't wait to see the next tax report. Does one have to file a report when you go under?
Wise up, Mike Fry, you are riding a dead horse.
Wrong. Here is the status of this "No Kill" shelter.
http://www.ag.state.mn.us/charities/SearchResults2.asp?Fed=411311053&Yr=CURR&cmdSearch=Submit
Organization Name FRIENDS OF ANIMAL ADOPTIONS, INC. D/B/A ANIMAL ARK
Federal ID# 411311053
For Fiscal Year Ending 8/31/2009
Income
Direct Public Support $508,228
Government Grants $0
Other Revenue $337,711
Total Revenue $845,939
Expenses
Amount Spent for Program or Charitable Purposes $831,978
Management/General Expense $144,878
Fundraising Expense $53,595
Total Expenses $1,030,451
Excess/Deficit $-184,512
Total Assets $937,636
Total Liabilities $522,056
End of Year Fund Bal/Net Worth $415,580
Wait, there's more. Since the year before their donations dropped dramatically. They better get the Whino off the radio show it looks like.
Organization Name FRIENDS OF ANIMAL ADOPTIONS, INC. D/B/A ANIMAL ARK
Federal ID# 411311053
For Fiscal Year Ending 8/31/2008
Income
Direct Public Support $786,232
Government Grants $0
Other Revenue $312,631
Total Revenue $1,098,863
Expenses
Amount Spent for Program or Charitable Purposes $941,401
Management/General Expense $122,802
Fundraising Expense $24,431
Total Expenses $1,088,634
Excess/Deficit $10,229
Total Assets $1,067,694
Total Liabilities $467,602
End of Year Fund Bal/Net Worth $600,092
Wow, can't wait to see the next tax report. Does one have to file a report when you go under?
Wise up, Mike Fry, you are riding a dead horse.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Nathan Winograd Yells Blackmail
You think that the Whino is sane? Well, think again. Along with his rantings about Stark, his selective memory about the Tompkins County deficit (which he admitted to and is in public records), here is where he posted that a reporter, Craig Malisow, tried to blackmail him. Just had to dig it up with all this happening about Stark. I'm quicker than the Whino, because he took this off his blog within an hour of posting it. Gotcha, Whino.
http://www.nathanwinograd.com/linked/malisowblackmail.PDF
January 27, 2009
Margaret Downing
Managing Editor
Houston Press
By Fax and E-Mail: 713-280-2444
Dear Ms. Downing,
I just read the blog by Craig Malisow claiming he is going to show my "real" credentials in an in-depth piece about me in the Houston Press tomorrow. I was always concerned about the tenor of his questions, feeling he was looking for dirt on me, rather than focusing on the issue at hand: shelter reform in Houston. I suggested that rather than talking to only detractors, he speak to successful shelter directors such as Bonney Brown in Reno, Suzanne Kogut in Charlottesville, and Abigail Smith in Tompkins County. He chose not to.
Instead, he sent me the enclosed e-mail attempting to blackmail me for money. When I challenged him on it, he claimed it was just a joke, but his refusal to speak to successful shelter directors, and his teaser of somehow exposing me, the tenor of his questions, and the fact that it is not funny, unprofessional, and in fact is blackmail on its face, puts his claim of trying to be funny into doubt. It has also caused me a great deal of personal distress.
After I received this e-mail, I debated not responding to further e-mails, but frankly I feared not being supported by his superiors, and angrying him further. But I see now that an appeal to fairness with Mr. Malisow has fallen on deaf ears. I am asking that the Houston Press look into the matter, censure Mr. Malisow, and preempt the publication of any hit piece. It isn't fair and it isn't right.
Trying to blackmail someone is neither funny nor professional. It is, in fact, illegal. Of course, I didn't pay the cash but maybe my detractors did? Even if it was a joke, it shows a remarkable level of unprofessionalism and lack of sense. Please do what is right.
Very truly yours,
Nathan J. Winograd
When Patricia J. Ruland was doing her story in Austin, Winograd wrote to her editor, not accusing her of blackmail, but accusing her of unprofessionalism, blah,blah,blah. The editor of the Austin Chronicle fired back at him that he stood by his reporter and wondered how Winograd knew what the article was about BEFORE it had even been written or published.
I'll tell you how he knew, he knew from the type of questions being asked by Ruland and Malisow. Some people have enough common sense to know that Winograd's version just doesn't make sense. Winograd also said that Bonney Brown in Reno was displeased for whatever reason when Ruland interviewed her and the editor invited Brown to voice that directly to him. She never did.
It doesn't take a psychologist to see that there is something bad wrong with Winograd. It takes an idiot to think that he is sane. Birds of a feather shit together, Brent Toellner and Mike Fry.
Honesty
http://www.nathanwinograd.com/linked/malisowblackmail.PDF
January 27, 2009
Margaret Downing
Managing Editor
Houston Press
By Fax and E-Mail: 713-280-2444
Dear Ms. Downing,
I just read the blog by Craig Malisow claiming he is going to show my "real" credentials in an in-depth piece about me in the Houston Press tomorrow. I was always concerned about the tenor of his questions, feeling he was looking for dirt on me, rather than focusing on the issue at hand: shelter reform in Houston. I suggested that rather than talking to only detractors, he speak to successful shelter directors such as Bonney Brown in Reno, Suzanne Kogut in Charlottesville, and Abigail Smith in Tompkins County. He chose not to.
Instead, he sent me the enclosed e-mail attempting to blackmail me for money. When I challenged him on it, he claimed it was just a joke, but his refusal to speak to successful shelter directors, and his teaser of somehow exposing me, the tenor of his questions, and the fact that it is not funny, unprofessional, and in fact is blackmail on its face, puts his claim of trying to be funny into doubt. It has also caused me a great deal of personal distress.
After I received this e-mail, I debated not responding to further e-mails, but frankly I feared not being supported by his superiors, and angrying him further. But I see now that an appeal to fairness with Mr. Malisow has fallen on deaf ears. I am asking that the Houston Press look into the matter, censure Mr. Malisow, and preempt the publication of any hit piece. It isn't fair and it isn't right.
Trying to blackmail someone is neither funny nor professional. It is, in fact, illegal. Of course, I didn't pay the cash but maybe my detractors did? Even if it was a joke, it shows a remarkable level of unprofessionalism and lack of sense. Please do what is right.
Very truly yours,
Nathan J. Winograd
When Patricia J. Ruland was doing her story in Austin, Winograd wrote to her editor, not accusing her of blackmail, but accusing her of unprofessionalism, blah,blah,blah. The editor of the Austin Chronicle fired back at him that he stood by his reporter and wondered how Winograd knew what the article was about BEFORE it had even been written or published.
I'll tell you how he knew, he knew from the type of questions being asked by Ruland and Malisow. Some people have enough common sense to know that Winograd's version just doesn't make sense. Winograd also said that Bonney Brown in Reno was displeased for whatever reason when Ruland interviewed her and the editor invited Brown to voice that directly to him. She never did.
It doesn't take a psychologist to see that there is something bad wrong with Winograd. It takes an idiot to think that he is sane. Birds of a feather shit together, Brent Toellner and Mike Fry.
Honesty
WINOGRAD, YOU ARE LYING AGAIN AND AGAIN, AND AGAIN
This is the only blog that I am associated with, you jerk. The other blogs are by people that I don't even know who they are. Get it through that ugly head of yours with those chipmunk cheeks that say you are no vegan, that there is a growing army of those who have been disillusioned by your worthless program. People who have seen the damage your "NKE" has done to shelters and continues to do. WE ARE FED UP WITH YOU AND WE AIN'T TAKING IT ANYMORE!! We are exposing you for what you are, one sick, demented sadistic killer of animals. WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE, WINEY, ABOUT ME OR THESE OTHER BLOGS? You don't have any, not one piece. No wonder you failed as an attorney, you don't know the meaning of EVIDENCE. I challenge you once again to produce and back up what you say, you freaking coward!!!
And to all those PUPPETS who followed this berserk liar, ask him for the evidence. Don't continue to take his word, HE IS NOT THE MESSIAH. Stop letting him make fools of you all unless you want to be his fool.
This is Pat Dunaway
and I'm not scared of you but you are scared of me.
And to all those PUPPETS who followed this berserk liar, ask him for the evidence. Don't continue to take his word, HE IS NOT THE MESSIAH. Stop letting him make fools of you all unless you want to be his fool.
This is Pat Dunaway
and I'm not scared of you but you are scared of me.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Stark and the Whino
I was sorely disappointed that the Huffington Post took down all the comments on Stark's last piece. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mike-stark/how-to-communicate-with-n_b_774739.html But I managed to put this together to save for prospertity.
Update: It turns out Mike Stark surrendered his “Pit Bull” (pit bull mix at best) at his local shelter, which just happened to be the Charlottesville SPCA, a facility I helped make No Kill and which is following the No Kill Equation model of sheltering. (It's a non profit, not subject to public records so how do we know what they are doing, take your word for it Winograd?)Stark admits his dog is doing well and most importantly, alive. (but it has been in foster care for two years, hardly a sucess story for "No Kill") Had Susanne Kogut not visited me when I was in Tompkins County, had she not taken the job at my urging, had I not done training for the staff there, had she not followed the model, (a lot of animals would have been better off, not languishing in their cages for years) Stark’s dog would be dead. (And how would you know?)His tribute to his dog? Attacking the person who played a role in keeping that dog alive. (it would piss me off to if I had been lead down a rosey path with a promise that the dog would be adopted and wasn't. Seems Kogut didn't try very hard to place this dog in a permanent home) And why did Stark get rid of his dog? He was having a baby. (And Stark had the good sense to realize that his dog was much too big and hyper to be around a child, in other words he cares about human life which is more than we can say about the Whino) This is the new spokesman for the anti-No Kill, pro-killing crowd. (Oh, we hope) It is pathetic and shameful. (Not near as much as your deceit and lies, Winograd)
Further Update: I posted a comment on his community blog that I would not be responding to Stark because I read online that he had been arrested. (No where on his "source" did it refer to Stark being arrested) Mike Stark subsequently e-mailed me and threatened me with a lawsuit because he says the information I found on the internet that he was arrested at Bill O’Reilly’s home following incidents at his speaking engagements is not accurate. ( and how many people have you threatened, Whino. You have sent two cease and desist orders to Pat Dunaway, and I know others you've done the same to) And he demands a retraction. Really? For a guy who tries to make his reputation defaming me based on inaccurate (sic, should be accurate) information he gets on the internet, this is really a case of the pot calling the kettle black. (What inaccurate info, it was all true) Will Stark be retracting his crossing of the line by accusing me of being in league with puppy mills? (Why should he, the puppy millers all claim you are their friend, that's all over the internet) Will he stop the Nathan Winograd “is for torture” attacks? (Well you are, you praised PACCA all the while animals were being tortured with overcrowding, disease, lack of care or do you conveniently forget about that one too?) Because that, also, as he says “tests the boundaries of New York Times vs. Sullivan.” Will Stark play by the same rules? Or will he continue to play the Karl Rovian-game of slander? (You're the only one playing that game)
According to information online, including Wikipedia, Stark confronted O’Reilly at his home. (And if you read all the links, it was journalism. He had a camera man with him, not quite the same as your stalking Pat Dunaway with absolutely no evidence to back yourself up) He also went to O’Reilly’s neighbors telling them that O’Reilly could not be trusted with their daughters. (And in your name the ADL-LA did the same thing, only they picked on the kids in the neighborhood. They destroyed property, they smoke bombed high rise apartments with innocent people living there, all in your name, trying to force you onto the City of LA) [Do not read this as support for O’Reilly’s politics. I’ve posted extensively about my politics: www.nathanwinograd.com/?p=2153.] (Your politics? Your agenda is more like it)
But I was scared (Bullshit) when I read online that Stark actually targeted his home with those kinds of attacks. (It didn't bother you when the ADL-LA smoke bombed that apartment building with children living in, all in your name, Whino) Did I want my kids being similarly confronted by Stark because he now targets me? (Your kids will know one day what a wanker their dad is anyway. You didn't consider the innocent kids that day the ADL-LA smoke bombed their home in your name) Did I want my neighbors being told I am for torture or in league with puppy mills who torture dogs? (Yes, they need to know. Just like the ADL-LA did to the directors of animal control all in your name trying to get you hired in LA, you can dish it out but you can't take it? ) What else was Mike Stark capable of? I also received two e-mails from people telling me to be careful. (Just two?? Doesn't look like you have many friends.)
According to Wikipedia, even liberal commentator Keith Olbermann named Stark one of his worst persons in the world. (Like who cares?) But Stark says he was not arrested for that conduct and says that this doesn’t amount to stalking. (Turn about was fair play in this case, after all it was O'Reilly who did the same thing to JetBlue but you aren't accusing O'Reilly of anything.) I was using it in the colloquial sense, but fine, it has legal connotations and I fully retract the statement. (No, Winograd, as usual you distorted the facts for your own personal agenda. Lawsuit scares you but you have sent so many cease and desist orders threatening people with a lawsuit, they can't be counted. Turn about is fair play I would say)
But this does not mean I am not scared of what Stark is capable of. (Yeah, right, and your shit don't stink either.) And it does not mean I think he is acting responsibly by attacking me also based on lies. (You're scared alright, scared that your scam is ending) Apparently for Stark, the rules only run one way. (Oh get real) Mike Stark claims he is a liberal commentator, but he has more in common with the Karl Rove politics of personal destruction than he cares to admit. (Chaps your butt that you couldn't scare him, doesn't it? How does it feel to be on the receiving end, Winograd?)
Honesty
Update: It turns out Mike Stark surrendered his “Pit Bull” (pit bull mix at best) at his local shelter, which just happened to be the Charlottesville SPCA, a facility I helped make No Kill and which is following the No Kill Equation model of sheltering. (It's a non profit, not subject to public records so how do we know what they are doing, take your word for it Winograd?)Stark admits his dog is doing well and most importantly, alive. (but it has been in foster care for two years, hardly a sucess story for "No Kill") Had Susanne Kogut not visited me when I was in Tompkins County, had she not taken the job at my urging, had I not done training for the staff there, had she not followed the model, (a lot of animals would have been better off, not languishing in their cages for years) Stark’s dog would be dead. (And how would you know?)His tribute to his dog? Attacking the person who played a role in keeping that dog alive. (it would piss me off to if I had been lead down a rosey path with a promise that the dog would be adopted and wasn't. Seems Kogut didn't try very hard to place this dog in a permanent home) And why did Stark get rid of his dog? He was having a baby. (And Stark had the good sense to realize that his dog was much too big and hyper to be around a child, in other words he cares about human life which is more than we can say about the Whino) This is the new spokesman for the anti-No Kill, pro-killing crowd. (Oh, we hope) It is pathetic and shameful. (Not near as much as your deceit and lies, Winograd)
Further Update: I posted a comment on his community blog that I would not be responding to Stark because I read online that he had been arrested. (No where on his "source" did it refer to Stark being arrested) Mike Stark subsequently e-mailed me and threatened me with a lawsuit because he says the information I found on the internet that he was arrested at Bill O’Reilly’s home following incidents at his speaking engagements is not accurate. ( and how many people have you threatened, Whino. You have sent two cease and desist orders to Pat Dunaway, and I know others you've done the same to) And he demands a retraction. Really? For a guy who tries to make his reputation defaming me based on inaccurate (sic, should be accurate) information he gets on the internet, this is really a case of the pot calling the kettle black. (What inaccurate info, it was all true) Will Stark be retracting his crossing of the line by accusing me of being in league with puppy mills? (Why should he, the puppy millers all claim you are their friend, that's all over the internet) Will he stop the Nathan Winograd “is for torture” attacks? (Well you are, you praised PACCA all the while animals were being tortured with overcrowding, disease, lack of care or do you conveniently forget about that one too?) Because that, also, as he says “tests the boundaries of New York Times vs. Sullivan.” Will Stark play by the same rules? Or will he continue to play the Karl Rovian-game of slander? (You're the only one playing that game)
According to information online, including Wikipedia, Stark confronted O’Reilly at his home. (And if you read all the links, it was journalism. He had a camera man with him, not quite the same as your stalking Pat Dunaway with absolutely no evidence to back yourself up) He also went to O’Reilly’s neighbors telling them that O’Reilly could not be trusted with their daughters. (And in your name the ADL-LA did the same thing, only they picked on the kids in the neighborhood. They destroyed property, they smoke bombed high rise apartments with innocent people living there, all in your name, trying to force you onto the City of LA) [Do not read this as support for O’Reilly’s politics. I’ve posted extensively about my politics: www.nathanwinograd.com/?p=2153.] (Your politics? Your agenda is more like it)
But I was scared (Bullshit) when I read online that Stark actually targeted his home with those kinds of attacks. (It didn't bother you when the ADL-LA smoke bombed that apartment building with children living in, all in your name, Whino) Did I want my kids being similarly confronted by Stark because he now targets me? (Your kids will know one day what a wanker their dad is anyway. You didn't consider the innocent kids that day the ADL-LA smoke bombed their home in your name) Did I want my neighbors being told I am for torture or in league with puppy mills who torture dogs? (Yes, they need to know. Just like the ADL-LA did to the directors of animal control all in your name trying to get you hired in LA, you can dish it out but you can't take it? ) What else was Mike Stark capable of? I also received two e-mails from people telling me to be careful. (Just two?? Doesn't look like you have many friends.)
According to Wikipedia, even liberal commentator Keith Olbermann named Stark one of his worst persons in the world. (Like who cares?) But Stark says he was not arrested for that conduct and says that this doesn’t amount to stalking. (Turn about was fair play in this case, after all it was O'Reilly who did the same thing to JetBlue but you aren't accusing O'Reilly of anything.) I was using it in the colloquial sense, but fine, it has legal connotations and I fully retract the statement. (No, Winograd, as usual you distorted the facts for your own personal agenda. Lawsuit scares you but you have sent so many cease and desist orders threatening people with a lawsuit, they can't be counted. Turn about is fair play I would say)
But this does not mean I am not scared of what Stark is capable of. (Yeah, right, and your shit don't stink either.) And it does not mean I think he is acting responsibly by attacking me also based on lies. (You're scared alright, scared that your scam is ending) Apparently for Stark, the rules only run one way. (Oh get real) Mike Stark claims he is a liberal commentator, but he has more in common with the Karl Rove politics of personal destruction than he cares to admit. (Chaps your butt that you couldn't scare him, doesn't it? How does it feel to be on the receiving end, Winograd?)
Honesty
REX IS CONVICTED!!!
NOTE OF INTEREST: At the time it was noted before City Council by Michelle Dawson with the City Manager's office that Winograd had no references yet he was selected over the HSUS to audit the shelter for $25,000. You think there was no hanky panky there? You bet there was and Michelle Dawson left her position, took a lesser position further away from her home because she probably knew too much.
I realize that you guys won't know who or what about this so let me explain.
Rex Gutierrez was the Rancho Cucamonga City Council member responsble for bringing in Winograd. He has been convicted on several counts, two counts of grand theft and one count each of conspiracy to commit a crime and filing a fraudulent claim. In other words, he is a crook.
The first Ad Hoc meeting I attended, I was sitting at the table with Michelle Dawson of the City Manager's office when Rex walked in with the "activist" who was pushing to bring in Winograd. I watched those two, turned to Michelle, expecting her to direct them out of the room, and when she didn't, I said, "Michelle, those two need to find a room". She informed me of who they were and I was shocked. I responded I didn't care, they need to find a room and fast. They were all over each other, it was so obvious what was going on.
Upon leaving the meeting, I jumped the head of animal control as to why she didn't tell me about this and she said she didn't want to influence me. I can understand that. It was so apparent what was happening and why it was happening. Pillow talk brought Winograd to Rancho, without a doubt.
So I just had to post this. Makes me wonder how many other places have seen the same thing. This particular activist dropped out of sight once the Winograd program was installed. She didn't care when Rancho had them stacked and crated in the hallways. She didn't care when the State report showed they were letting them die in the kennels. She didn't care when the staff came in and found a bloody mess from their housing dogs with pit bulls. She didn't care when disease went through the shelter. Oh, she's still in Rancho, working in the Recreation Department, a new job after her activism on the shelter so she is aware of what is happening there. This activist filed two cases against her boyfriend for domestic abuse too. The first time not bothering to show for court. When a woman does that, she makes all women look bad. Her sister commited suicide by jumping from a bridge over the 210 freeway during all this.
Just had to vent. Justice is coming to Rexxie and no one deserves it more than he does. Makes you wonder just how far Winograd and his cronies will go.
Pat Dunaway
I realize that you guys won't know who or what about this so let me explain.
Rex Gutierrez was the Rancho Cucamonga City Council member responsble for bringing in Winograd. He has been convicted on several counts, two counts of grand theft and one count each of conspiracy to commit a crime and filing a fraudulent claim. In other words, he is a crook.
The first Ad Hoc meeting I attended, I was sitting at the table with Michelle Dawson of the City Manager's office when Rex walked in with the "activist" who was pushing to bring in Winograd. I watched those two, turned to Michelle, expecting her to direct them out of the room, and when she didn't, I said, "Michelle, those two need to find a room". She informed me of who they were and I was shocked. I responded I didn't care, they need to find a room and fast. They were all over each other, it was so obvious what was going on.
Upon leaving the meeting, I jumped the head of animal control as to why she didn't tell me about this and she said she didn't want to influence me. I can understand that. It was so apparent what was happening and why it was happening. Pillow talk brought Winograd to Rancho, without a doubt.
So I just had to post this. Makes me wonder how many other places have seen the same thing. This particular activist dropped out of sight once the Winograd program was installed. She didn't care when Rancho had them stacked and crated in the hallways. She didn't care when the State report showed they were letting them die in the kennels. She didn't care when the staff came in and found a bloody mess from their housing dogs with pit bulls. She didn't care when disease went through the shelter. Oh, she's still in Rancho, working in the Recreation Department, a new job after her activism on the shelter so she is aware of what is happening there. This activist filed two cases against her boyfriend for domestic abuse too. The first time not bothering to show for court. When a woman does that, she makes all women look bad. Her sister commited suicide by jumping from a bridge over the 210 freeway during all this.
Just had to vent. Justice is coming to Rexxie and no one deserves it more than he does. Makes you wonder just how far Winograd and his cronies will go.
Pat Dunaway
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)