The details, and numbers, matter.
Let's talk numbers.
Let's scrutinize details.
Let's demand real answers to real questions so that everyone feels good about the care we expect for the animals of our community.
The organization that establishes criteria for the reporting of numbers in shelters is Best Friends (bestfriends.org). There is no designation for "live placement." They are the experts in the field of shelters. They have incredible data to support their tireless efforts to protect and promote the unwanted and misplaced. The industry standard that every shelter is trying to attain, as the Gold Standard of shelter care, is "no-kill." To be designated as "no-kill" you have to meet certain, industry determined criteria. It is the best measure of how compassionate a place can be. It is, as most experts will agree, unattainable if you are "open admission." When a large percentage of your operating funds come from the general public perception is paramount. Here, as above, the HCHS has not used the standard terminology of "live release" but instead "live placement." Marketing motivates money. See more on this here. Repeated requests for "live release" numbers have not been provided.
The issue with almost everything that comes from the shelter when they are scrutinized, held to accountability that requires the difficult decisions that a shelter inevitably faces, is that they are a private entity. This designation comes up a lot. It is the crutch the Board of Directors uses when they don't want to answer for their actions. It is the noose that the HCHS puts around the County Executors who have nowhere else to send the animals of the county. Being private provides them the latitude to decide who they hire. What they pay, and how they execute the contract they have with the county. The HCHS does not have to provide the same degree of oversight or scrutiny that a public facility would. They have a contract with Harford County to provide the services needed for the animals that are lost, found, relinquished, or seized. I don't think that most people would argue with this. There has to be a place for these animals. There also has to a large degree of trust in those who take care of the animals to the degree that this counties residents expect.
Let your numbers talk by providing the details that explain how you got them. This only happens with transparency. Transparency is integral to building, and maintaining trust. See here.
How do we find the numbers? You ask very direct questions and require very direct answers.
Where are the numbers for 2024? Why is there such a large difference on line number 15 on the 990 from 2024? How much is each staff member being paid? Are there, have there been "bonuses" given out?
In the latest meeting with the County Executives and the shelter can be found here.
The article in the Aegis about the budget meeting is here.
Listen to the audio of the meeting, maybe you will feel as I do?
The cronies network in Harford County is obvious and troubling. Why would the taxpayers want such cronyism? Isn't impartiality integral to objectivism? The audio of the meeting sounds more like a cocktail hour than a government oversight discussion. I kept thinking about Gayle Kings and her "have you all been to space?" Like some loss of reality to the commoners. They probably feel like its so absurd to criticize, but, as an outsider that's what I heard. They have each other, and they cover for each other. It just seems that they also forgot to ask any hard questions of each other?
There are so many points of omission that are impactful that the concerns of trust and transparency are even more obvious.
The numbers above are just from the numbers they want to give you. The numbers only indicate what you want to share. If you are asking for taxpayers money maybe have an outside, unbiased (i.e. no one from the Board or County Council), look at them. Its putting your money, and integrity, and trust, and transparency, where your mouth is. It is so convenient to be able to claim your "private" status, and yet shut out the public, its scrutiny, and the accountability that comes along with it. When there is nothing to hide you hide nothing.
From the head of the Board:
"We've addressed every single issue that has been out there, and it seems like once we do, something else pops up." Sounds like maybe you have a lot of problems that the "ignore them and they will go away" isn't working for?
Still waiting for that meeting Mr Heidelmaier. Rumor has it you are retiring soon.
"Euthanasia is under 90%." Is the shelter euthanizing 89%? Why is 90 % such an important number? See here
There are numerous animals that have been euthanized without meeting the MOU that is published. If I cannot get a straight answer about the parvo dogs who else has been euthanized without meeting your own standards? What happened to BC and Junior? If the parvo dogs were euthanized outside of the veterinarians care why? Why not utilize the resident experts? Let's also hear about how many hours they work? Stating to the public that you are "fully staffed" and yet I am told there are not 4 veterinarians still making up a full time veterinarian is, well, another careful omission, i.e. deceitful.
How much are the staff at the shelter paid? I am told that the part time behavior expert, also related to another staff member is being paid more than the veterinarians? What about the week long continuing education/vacation in Las Vegas? If you need to ask taxpayers for additional funds to stay operating perhaps the public scrutiny of a week in Vegas is another convenient omission?
 |
| On this Mothers Day My mom, with her dog Templeton, rescued from the HCHS at 16 years old |
What harms the shelter? Not answering questions. Not being forthcoming. The good old boys network holds. No one will meet. No one will answer. I am still awaiting the meeting I have been told I will have. The excuse; don't answer the hard questions because more had questions might follow?
"We do not believe that we are doing anything wrong." How can you say that when you ignore those asking for clarification?
Admission of ED having no animal background. Lets ask the veterinarians what they think? Why wasn't this infectious disease outbreak overseen by 1 of "the four veterinarians" you have on staff? The answer I have been given by two of them is; "they are an employee. They are not given the authority." They have been undermined and overridden by other shelter employees without any medical experience.
Why is everyone afraid to talk? And how long can you hide behind the excuse that you are "private" when asking for taxpayers dollars as you euthanize our animals?
No comments:
Post a Comment