that's a lot of money to pay out, when most taxpayers don't even know what happens behind those doors at that shelter. for an example they had the check and they still had the jersey journal print that story that the city owed them 95,000. why would someone do that if they were paid???

shadrack - the sole reason they would not be able to do it is that they would not have the right people in place. hiring would be done strictly based on politics, not merit. however, LHS is dangerously close to adopting that practice it seems.

Quote:

The last time Jersey City took a more direct role in running a "dog pound," an employee stomped on a kitten's head after the kitten bit the staff member, injured animals went untreated, cash donations and fees were pocketed, and "premium" breeds were sold to the highest bidder.

I am not writing about Carbajales and the recent tragic events at the HCSPCA, but Jersey City's animal care history. Remember that even while Jersey City contracted with LHS, the city knew that abuse and neglect were taking place at the old HCSPCA which is located within city limits.

No, Jersey City cannot be part of day to day operations at a facility ever again.

Quote:

You needed to know the fact that those municipalities that pays $4-$6 per capita for animal welfare services doesn't have an animal pound facility and must pay the price to contract with an animal shelter in order to provide such services as mandated by state law. Since there are very few animal shelters around that can provide municipalities with such (impoundment) services for stray animals, those municipalities are at their mercy and must pay the high price to do so. As time goes on so does the cost of running an animal shelter along with animal pound services. Look how much it is now costing the city to support such operation. The city is now paying for the cost of two (animal shelter and for an animal pound) operations which is very costly to operate. The state only mandates a city to provide only an animal pound not an animal shelter in order to do animal impoundment services for their municipality.

Jersey City is fortunate that they have and own their own animal pound facility but for some reason they decided to contract it out and spend all of that kind of money rather than doing it in house which could have save the city hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.

it doesnt, does it!?

hopefully its just growing pains. still though, the animals (and taxpayers) shouldn't get the short end of the stick while they go through thier learning process.

That doesn't sound too good!

theres no question that the shelter needs ALL of the money requested to function in the best way possible. Theres no "rape" going on whatsoever.

however, its highly unlikely that its being run as efficiently as it should. The executive director and the director of operations have never worked in a shelter before. Director level positions. LHS went an entire year without an executive director (80k) and they were able to raise thier live release rate drastically and pass a state inspection @ 100% for the first time ever. nevermind get a rave review from an independent auditor. granted the finances were not kept in order but the operations were. it doesnt make sense that the finances should catch up and the quality of the operation go down which, maybe it is..

Quote:

The city leases the land to Liberty Shelter for 1.00 a year for 45 years. Seems like the shelter is jumping on the rape the tax-payer bandwagon. There needs to be full disclosure before the city increases any monies. Didn't they just bail out the shelter a few months ago giving them an additional 100k when they cried to city council threatening to shut their doors cause they couldn't make payroll? How many new people have they recently hired and at what salaries? Where is the money match from the private donor? If the money match is dollar for dollar this would bring income in for over a million dollars and that's without paying rent.

just wondering too..

on a related note... where might one be able to see the reports of the state inspections that were made over the last couple years?

as far as the board goes - it seemed like they were operating at a loss and being accused of a lot more, then a whole new board came in and ordered an operational audit and then most of them quit. maybe they didnt find what they were looking for, i dunno. then more new board members and then the management all left.

certain donors come along with certain members of the board/executive staff. its pretty obvious.

Quote:

I heard this too - what's going on at LHS???

you mean they would answer questions about why nearly the entire board of directors was turned over twice in the past year as well as why the entire management staff was replaced by people who have never managed a shelter before?

would they provide a detailed plan to go no kill that included securing resources before they started stockpiling animals?

just wondering..

The information you are suggesting was provided at the LHS annual meeting on October 29. It was open to the public. I am sure they would be happy to provide you with a hard copy of the presentation that was given as well as answer any questions you may have.

Quote:

Quote:

Before you make a comment like that I beg you to take a little time to go over to LHS and visit the 200 cats and 60 dogs that are caged right now just looking for some love, attention, food and shelter. Take a tour of the isolation rooms where these animals are being nursed back from being brought into the shelter starving, sick, hurt and/or neglected.

This year alone, 2800 surrendered and stray animals will go through LHS and that costs money. If you break down that $700,000 operating budget you will see that that isn't alot of money per animal brought in.

Also, you need to keep in mind that other municipalities pay $4-$6 per capita for animal welfare services and Jersey City pays $1.50.

the money is deserved but so is a detailed budget, mission statement and plan of action from LHS

WOW. That is a lot of money to feed a few cats and dogs.
I still don't so why the city is increasing the budget when they have budget issues. LHS was not looking for money money. The City Council just seems to have a hardon for spending money

Shelter wants rest of money in its contract
Shelter's putting hand out for $96G

Wednesday, December 16, 2009
By MELISSA HAYES
JOURNAL STAFF WRITER

Liberty Humane Society officials showed up at the Jersey City City Council caucus meeting Monday to say the city owes them $95,000 for taking in strays.

And city officials told them they're right.

The problem should be cleared up tonight when council members are expected to vote to cough up the cash.

The glitch apparently had to do with confusion over the ending date of the shelter's contract with the city. Some city officials were under the impression the contract expired in August, shelter officials said.

But it really ended Oct. 31.

And in July, the council voted to increase the shelter's annual contract with the city from $283,506 to $494,481 - covering Nov. 1, 2008 to Oct. 31, 2009 - to prevent the shelter from closing.

But an even larger issue looms for the shelter and city officials.

The contract that expired on Oct. 31 hasn't been renewed - and the shelter continues to provide the services.

Liberty Humane Society Executive Director Joanna Hopkinson and Director of Development Janet Russell urged the council Monday to renew the contract and stick with the new amount voted in July.

"We are able to keep increasing our services to you as long as our budget is funded," Russell told council members.

It costs about $700,000 annually to operate the shelter, which is also supported through private donations.

Councilman at large Mariano Vega Jr. suggested extending the current contract until a new one is negotiated. "There's no reason to hurt people that are helping us," he said.

Liberty Humane Society asks Jersey City to maintain funding level

By Melissa Hayes/The Jersey Journal
December 15, 2009, 3:14PM

Liberty Humane Society officials hope Jersey City will continue funding the shelter, which is caring for about 200 cats and 60 dogs.Officials at Liberty Humane Society want to make sure Jersey City doesn?t drastically cut the shelter?s funding.

Liberty officials attended last night's City Council caucus meeting to sort out a payment issue and discuss renewal of the city?s contract with the shelter.

Despite a looming budget gap, the council voted in July to increase the society?s annual contract from $283,506 to $494,481 to prevent the shelter from closing.

Liberty Humane Society Executive Director Joanna Hopkinson and Director of Development Janet Russell attended the City Council caucus seeking $95,000 the city contractually owes the shelter for services provided from June through October.

Russell said today the payment, which covers costs from June through October, was withheld while city officials worked to determine when the contract with the shelter expired.

Council President Peter Brennan said that issue was resolved and the shelter will be paid. The City Council is expected to vote on the expenditure tomorrow.

But in the meantime, the city?s contract with the shelter expired Nov. 1 and shelter staff continue to take in cats and dogs dropped off by city animal control officials.

?We are able to keep increasing our services to you as long as our budget is funded,? Russell told council members.

Russell said the shelter is concerned because it received a letter from the city about the need to negotiate a new contract. The letter referred to the old contract amount of $283,506.

She said using that figure as a starting point rather than the current budget rate of $494,481 could jeopardize the shelter.

It costs about $700,000 annually to operate the shelter, which is also supported through private donations.

Council members seemed to support the shelter. Councilman-at-Large Mariano Vega suggested extending the current contract until a new one is negotiated.

?There?s no reason to hurt people that are helping us,? he said.