Drake at Multnomah County Animal Services, since April 28, 2016.
Drake, a young Boxer/American pit bull mix impounded with a demand for owner surrender belongs to an impoverished family given a week to come up with a $500 deposit to allow an appeal of the agency’s demand. On Thursday night, August 04, the hearings officer forwarded her opinion confirming the agency’s preference with the note :
“ MCAS is encouraged to evaluate Drake and consider if MCAS can re-home Drake at a home that is able to comply with Drake’s PDD restriction.”
The hearings process is so biased that a senior animal control officer once said laughing, that she had assured the staff that hearings were only intended to rubber stamp agency decisions. They are. The agency chooses the compatible hearings officer.
The behavior assessment process at MCAS is also lacks transparency and any semblance of objectivity or fairness. Any standard forms met to gather information across behavior dimensions were discarded years ago. The Shelter Review Committee, where a stray animal goes to the Principal’s office for a life or death decision, is completely non-transparent: no notes are kept, its members are all in house, none have any animal behavior credentials, they vote up or down.
This is how ethical shelters make decisions, but not here in Multnomah County. This sort of unethical conduct has gone on unchecked for far longer than the 20 years we have dedicated to animal shelter reform starting with one case in 1995, that of Pookie Atkins caused everyone at the time to take a second look at MCAS practices. While Pookie and her family won after 16 months of solitary confinement, positive change did not follow. The county then removed all discretion fro m the county ordinance. Without pro bono legal help these decisions cannot even be challenged. When challenged the likelihood of winning at the county is small.
The plea sent to the county government on August 09, has not been answered and this impoverished family ,like those before them has a week ending this Friday, August 12, to meet the county’s demand of $500 paid in full for a board deposit.
In an E-mail I wrote about these concerns:
Sent: Tue, Aug 9, 2016 12:45 pm Subject: Multnomah County s' failure to abide by the Equity lens/equal justice mandate: Drake and his family’s case:
To: David Blankfeld, david.n.blankfeld
CC:Deborah Kafoury, County Chair mult.chair
CC: Robert Babcock, hwb-law.com
Drake MCAS 577334 and his family’s case: The Multnomah County Equity Lens: Failing to level the playing field for the impoverished
A few short years ago, when Marisa Madrigal assumed the position of interim county chair after County Chair Jeff Cogen's departure, the county adopted an "Equity Lens " policy to assure that the poor in Multnomah County had the same rights as the well to do. It was intended to level the playing field. So often fees and fines are used by some government officials in Multnomah County to exploit poverty and force surrender, directly compromising fairness and justice. Due process is made unaffordable .
When that policy was enacted, Mr. Peoples asked me to meet with him about the Equity Lens mandate (not a recommendation but a mandate). MCAS has most assuredly not complied with that mandate. This family is just one more case. The agency uses and leverages high fees, and applies short deadlines to extort surrender. Not only are the fees held to an unaffordable standard for the poor ( i.e. a $500 fine to a homeless person for "non-compliance"; $500 board deposit , the list is endless) but no time payments are allowed, no deferrals, and short deadlines. Most impoverished families must choose between their own survival,room and board, and saving the lives of their animals. They do not have "equal rights".
I do my personal best to help citizens struck by MCAS's non-compliance to that mandate. .
Drake’s case qualifies. His family is financially struggling, very low income, and have 3 small children, ages 8 and under, all of whom ask about Drake all of the time. They are very poor. You have never lived this way Mr. Blankfeld, nor would you know because you never ask or investigate/have no interest. I was struck by their poverty when I drove out because their telephone had been disconnected.
MCAS ordered a secure enclosure when Drake got out but then there was no help or resource referral. MCAS never made the appropriate referral to Fences for Fido. His family was saving up money from an already spare pocket but absent any help or offers suggesting a service component, Drake got out again through a window that had no pane.
For the crime of poverty, you asked that the dog be surrendered.
Although Drake has been kept in a solitary cell without exercise except on a very very few occasions since April 28, 2016, conditions that when imposed create deterioration, the agency notes suggest he has against all odds maintained a good temperament. However although the ordinance requires consideration of circumstances, you never do: neither of the incidents or life circumstance: poverty. The findings came in last Friday. You are demanding a $500 deposit by this Friday, August 12 from a poverty stricken family with small children. Bully for you.
What his family is fighting for is Drake's life. They would happily consent to re-homing but not killing him which would devastate the family and most especially their children. Drake happily lived with the children , and another small dog. His crime when out was involvement in 2 minor dog skirmishes/fights: no serious injuries. All Drake needed and needs is what all dogs need: a secure fence. Harder to find when poor.
If his life can be secured and reassurances that he will not be de facto killed, then the monies I would help raise for an appeal would go instead to re-homing and guaranteed training. We cooperated on such a joint effort before: Picasso, a level 4 dog, who kept getting out,owned by a mentally ill impoverished party. I found an approved home for him out of county. He actually is a service dog at an assisted living facility. Has a secure fence now.
Is that an option? If not let me know.
Thank you
Gail O'Connell-Babcock, PhD
Citizens for Humane Animal Legislation/Watchdog
