Why remove the DOH from the ACC?
One SRAC goal remains constant: to remove the Department of Health (DOH) from its stranglehold over the AC&C. Although the AC&C is technically a stand-alone 501(c)3 non-profit corporation, it has always been chained to the DOH. The DOH is charged with protecting people’s health. The wellbeing of animals is a mere ancillary concern … requiring the DOH’s attention only if an animal poses a health risk to people (e.g., rabies, bites, scratches). That is why the DOH will always treat the AC&C as an afterthought. Nowhere in the DOH's mandate is there a requirement for the "care" of animals. Only "control."
So long as the DOH controls the AC&C, animals will suffer. And how does the DOH control the ACC?
The DOH writes the AC&C's bylaws, appoints its Board of Directors and Executive Director, owns the buildings the AC&C occupies, writes the contract under which the AC&C operates, and sets the AC&C budget. The AC&C cannot negotiate with the DOH. It’s a take-it-or-leave-it proposition. It is a fiction to say that the AC&C is an independent entity. The AC&C is a de facto extension of the DOH.
So long as the DOH controls the AC&C, animals will suffer. And how does the DOH control the ACC?
The DOH writes the AC&C's bylaws, appoints its Board of Directors and Executive Director, owns the buildings the AC&C occupies, writes the contract under which the AC&C operates, and sets the AC&C budget. The AC&C cannot negotiate with the DOH. It’s a take-it-or-leave-it proposition. It is a fiction to say that the AC&C is an independent entity. The AC&C is a de facto extension of the DOH.
|
|
Directors. Budget. Buildings.
SRAC asks for your support to address these three urgent issues that have always hobbled AC&C:
AC&C Directors: We must replace the current AC&C Board of Directors, all of whom owe their allegiance to the DOH, which the Mayor’s Office has designated to deal with animal control. Three seats are reserved for the Departments of Health, Parks & Recreation, and Police (the so-called “ex officio” Directors). As the Mayor selects all Department heads, these “ex officio” members serve the Mayor … not the AC&C animals. They avoid doing anything that might embarrass the Mayor's
office. Admitting that the AC&C is in crisis would embarrass the DOH which is acting on the Mayor’s behalf.
The remaining 6 Directors are so-called “independent” directors. They are hardly independent, however. The DOH selects them after consultation with the Mayor's Office. That means that every Director – whether ex officio or “independent” -- is chosen for his/her loyalty to the Mayor. Not one director is selected for his or her unwavering concern for the City’s homeless
animals.
We need to force the AC&C to change its by-laws, to end the ability to pack the Board, and to place true animal advocates on the AC&C Board.
Turning to the position of AC&C Executive Director, the AC&C Board (oh, let’s be honest, the DOH) selects the ED, choosing candidates willing to accept the position without power or finances. Under Mayor Bloomberg, the AC&C has gone through 6 Executive Directors (in addition to 2 "Interim” Executive Directors (i.e., seat warming) ). Julie Bank has been the ED to have her contract renewed, and that's because she's the perfect ED: She's compliant, never challenges the DOH, and has proven her willingness to misrepresent and coverup shelter conditions. As long as the DOH selects the AC&C Executive Manager ... and the Executive Director is accountable to the DOH, failure is ensured. There is no independence. The AC&C remains an ignored stepchild of the DOH.
BUDGET: The AC&C’s budget has always been disgracefully insufficient. It is a line item carved from the DOH’s budget. The DOH never calculates what the AC&C actually needs to operate. Instead, it decides on a low-ball number that will divert the least amount of monies from the DOH’s core concern: healthcare services for people. But the AC&C fell into crisis after the DOH embarked on 2 years of savage cuts to the AC&C’s budget. In a backroom deal negotiated by The Mayor’s Alliance and the ASPCA on the one hand and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn on the other, the DOH promised to give the AC&C an extra $10 million over the next 3 years. But the quid pro quo was to relieve the DOH of its longstanding obligation to build animal shelters in the Bronx and Queens. The deal was fast-tracked through the City Council and was signed into law in September 2011 as “Local Law 59.”
The promised extra $10 million does little to make up for years of underfunding, although it has allowed the AC&C to start hiring new employees. Unfortunately, the AC&C Executive team is not up to the task of hiring the right people or managing them well. So, whatever monies the DOH deigns to hand over will be squandered. Nor has current AC&C Management been able to attract the financial support from the public. AC&C’s Fundraising Department is not up to the challenge of raising significant sums of money. And the bottom line problem: people don’t want to donate to a government agency, and the AC&C is an extension of the DOH.
BUILDINGS: The DOH owns every building the AC&C uses as shelters or receiving centers. The Manhattan and Brooklyn shelters were former factories the ASPCA left behind in December 1994 when it walked away from its contract with the DOH. These buildings were – and remain – unsuitable to serve as animal shelters. The long-delayed installation of a Heat Ventilation Air Conditioning (HVAC) system in the Manhattan Shelter did little to stem the tide of the upper respiratory infection virus (URI) infecting every square inch of that building. The Brooklyn shelter was similarly “renovated” in 1997; yet, URI still rages there.
With our City’s faltering economy, more and more homeless animals are making their way to these already overcrowded and disease-ridden shelters. Why are the shelters overcrowded? Because for 11 years the DOH ignored a law requiring them to build animal shelters in the Bronx and Queens. In September 2011 the ASPCA and the Mayor’s Alliance gave their blessings to have the City Council abolish the shelters law.
The ASPCA has flip-flopped on its position about the Bronx and Queens shelters. In 2009, ASPCA President Ed Sayres wrote that “these much-needed facilities would help decrease New York City’s overall euthanasia rate by reducing crowded conditions, both in these two shelters and in those in other boroughs, and provide opportunities for residents to adopt animals in their own communities.” (Without further statement the ASPCA has deleted that press release from its website.)
The Bronx and Queens will never have animal shelters. The existing shelters (in Manhattan, Brooklyn, and a tiny one on Staten Island will continue to be overcrowded.
That’s fine with the DOH and you’ll never hear AC&C Management even admitting that there’s overcrowding.
AC&C Directors: We must replace the current AC&C Board of Directors, all of whom owe their allegiance to the DOH, which the Mayor’s Office has designated to deal with animal control. Three seats are reserved for the Departments of Health, Parks & Recreation, and Police (the so-called “ex officio” Directors). As the Mayor selects all Department heads, these “ex officio” members serve the Mayor … not the AC&C animals. They avoid doing anything that might embarrass the Mayor's
office. Admitting that the AC&C is in crisis would embarrass the DOH which is acting on the Mayor’s behalf.
The remaining 6 Directors are so-called “independent” directors. They are hardly independent, however. The DOH selects them after consultation with the Mayor's Office. That means that every Director – whether ex officio or “independent” -- is chosen for his/her loyalty to the Mayor. Not one director is selected for his or her unwavering concern for the City’s homeless
animals.
We need to force the AC&C to change its by-laws, to end the ability to pack the Board, and to place true animal advocates on the AC&C Board.
Turning to the position of AC&C Executive Director, the AC&C Board (oh, let’s be honest, the DOH) selects the ED, choosing candidates willing to accept the position without power or finances. Under Mayor Bloomberg, the AC&C has gone through 6 Executive Directors (in addition to 2 "Interim” Executive Directors (i.e., seat warming) ). Julie Bank has been the ED to have her contract renewed, and that's because she's the perfect ED: She's compliant, never challenges the DOH, and has proven her willingness to misrepresent and coverup shelter conditions. As long as the DOH selects the AC&C Executive Manager ... and the Executive Director is accountable to the DOH, failure is ensured. There is no independence. The AC&C remains an ignored stepchild of the DOH.
BUDGET: The AC&C’s budget has always been disgracefully insufficient. It is a line item carved from the DOH’s budget. The DOH never calculates what the AC&C actually needs to operate. Instead, it decides on a low-ball number that will divert the least amount of monies from the DOH’s core concern: healthcare services for people. But the AC&C fell into crisis after the DOH embarked on 2 years of savage cuts to the AC&C’s budget. In a backroom deal negotiated by The Mayor’s Alliance and the ASPCA on the one hand and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn on the other, the DOH promised to give the AC&C an extra $10 million over the next 3 years. But the quid pro quo was to relieve the DOH of its longstanding obligation to build animal shelters in the Bronx and Queens. The deal was fast-tracked through the City Council and was signed into law in September 2011 as “Local Law 59.”
The promised extra $10 million does little to make up for years of underfunding, although it has allowed the AC&C to start hiring new employees. Unfortunately, the AC&C Executive team is not up to the task of hiring the right people or managing them well. So, whatever monies the DOH deigns to hand over will be squandered. Nor has current AC&C Management been able to attract the financial support from the public. AC&C’s Fundraising Department is not up to the challenge of raising significant sums of money. And the bottom line problem: people don’t want to donate to a government agency, and the AC&C is an extension of the DOH.
BUILDINGS: The DOH owns every building the AC&C uses as shelters or receiving centers. The Manhattan and Brooklyn shelters were former factories the ASPCA left behind in December 1994 when it walked away from its contract with the DOH. These buildings were – and remain – unsuitable to serve as animal shelters. The long-delayed installation of a Heat Ventilation Air Conditioning (HVAC) system in the Manhattan Shelter did little to stem the tide of the upper respiratory infection virus (URI) infecting every square inch of that building. The Brooklyn shelter was similarly “renovated” in 1997; yet, URI still rages there.
With our City’s faltering economy, more and more homeless animals are making their way to these already overcrowded and disease-ridden shelters. Why are the shelters overcrowded? Because for 11 years the DOH ignored a law requiring them to build animal shelters in the Bronx and Queens. In September 2011 the ASPCA and the Mayor’s Alliance gave their blessings to have the City Council abolish the shelters law.
The ASPCA has flip-flopped on its position about the Bronx and Queens shelters. In 2009, ASPCA President Ed Sayres wrote that “these much-needed facilities would help decrease New York City’s overall euthanasia rate by reducing crowded conditions, both in these two shelters and in those in other boroughs, and provide opportunities for residents to adopt animals in their own communities.” (Without further statement the ASPCA has deleted that press release from its website.)
The Bronx and Queens will never have animal shelters. The existing shelters (in Manhattan, Brooklyn, and a tiny one on Staten Island will continue to be overcrowded.
That’s fine with the DOH and you’ll never hear AC&C Management even admitting that there’s overcrowding.