This is an email from Steve Sacchitelli to Diana Jeffries, Nikki Dawson and others in regards to LHS
Subject: Crisis at Liberty Humane Society in Jersey City


EVERYONE PLEASE READ MY COMMENTS IN RESPONSE TO THE E MAIL FROM NIKKI DAWSON BELOW. PLEASE CROSS-POST WIDELY.


To Diana Jeffrey and Nikki Dawson, I have copied you here to give you the opportunity to respond, a courtesy you have not afforded Joanna Hopkinson, fired under the interim board made up of Diana Jeffrey, Bonnie Yost and Laura Moss, as you attempt to paint her as a "hoarder".

Is it true that you negotiated a gag order for Ms. Hopkinson and also for Janet Rusell, the former Development Director? If so, why? What is it that they might have to say that you would rather everyone not hear?

I was in the shelter about a week before Ms. Hopkinson was fired. It was crowded, yes. Was it spotless, no? Was it the hell-on-earth you are depicting? Absolutely not. I had made arrangements with Ms. Hopkinson to start a series of adoption, fund-raising and press campaigns. We were going to succeed.

But now, here we are, with an interim Board of Directors made up of the old members of the Board of Directors. The founders, the members, the Presidents, the Managers, all of whom presided over a shelter operation with kill rates in the range of 45 to 50%. Is it possible you didn't want this movement to succeed because it would highlight your failures?

I have more questions for all of you:

1. To Ms. Jeffrey, on contractual obligations:

Were you not the one who wrote and negotiated the contract between Jersey City and Liberty Humane?
Did that contract not require you to build approximately 75 proper dog runs sometime in the early to mid 2000s?
Why was this never done?
Do you think if it were the crowding at the shelter would be less of an issue?
Why do you not take any of the responsibility for the situation we have now?

As an attorney who has made a career of holding public officials accountable to their fiduciary duties, I find your apparent breech, here, especially troubling.

2. To Ms Dawson on your description of the shelter:

You circulated this note, below, claiming the shelter is holding 99 dogs in a shelter equipped only to house 50.
Does the current contract with the City of Jersey City not require that the shelter be able to hold up to 75 dogs?
Why do you think this contract was signed if the facility can only hold 50 dogs?
Are you an employee of the shelter? What is your role here?
Are you the one performing the actual "euthanasia"? Is death, in your view, more humane than the crowded conditions you complain about?

3. To Mr. O'Keefe and the rest of the board who so publicly resigned, on your obligations:

Did you not receive a $9,000 grant from the city of Hoboken, ear-marked specifically to buy proper cages?
What happened to this money?
Do you think if those cages were purchased these animals would not be dying now?:
What was the actual budget overage under Ms. Hopkinson's no-kill shelter? I have heard it is in the range of $30 to $40K.
As Board members, when a shelter Director hands you a no-kill shelter with a major donor behind her and a $40k budget problem, did you think it was more appropriate to fire the Director, kill the animals or quit rather than RAISE $40,000 TO KEEP THE ANIMALS ALIVE?

4. To Ms. Jeffrey, Ms. Yost and Ms. Moss on the firing of Joana Hopkinson:

In Diana Jeffrey's own words, Ms. Hopkinson was fired to stave off the appearance that one major donor pulled too much weight (paraphrased).

Really? A Director and a major donor, committed to 'No-Kill', were fired and potentially ostracized over politics? What about the animals?

Did you consider, for all of the complaining of budgetary woes, that alienating this major donor could make those problems worse if he pulls his money?
Ms. Dawson complains that there are only 2 kennel workers caring for and cleaning up after all of the animals. If this is true, why, then, would you fire an Executive Director PAID FOR BY THIS DONOR AND COSTING THE SHELTER NOTHING WHILE YOU KEEP A PAID MANAGER ON STAFF?

If it were me, I would keep the FREE Director and turn the PAID Manager into 1 or 2 paid kennel workers. Management 101.

5. To Ms. Jeffrey, Ms. Yost and Ms. Moss, on population and your kill policy:

You have maintained consistently that there was never and is not a plan for a mass killing of the animals. But here we are:

Is it true that 12 dogs were killed this week? How many cats?
Is it true that 32 dogs will be killed on Friday? How many cats will you kill?

If so, there we go, cutting the population in half by killing them, as everyone swore, for months, was not the plan, apparently was the plan all along.

Worst of all, I'm hearing that THE STAFF IS NOT ALLOWED TO PLACE ANIMALS IN RESCUE OR TO DO ADOPTIONS.

NO RESCUE ALLOWED?
NO ADOPTIONS ALLOWED?
YET THE PLACE IS OVERFLOWING! GEE...

Several months ago Ms. Hopkinson held an adoption even that placed 37 animals in one weekend. This friday you will kill that many while restricting placements and doing absolutely no adoption events while you criticize everyone under the moon but yourselves.

It's past time you all stepped aside. Seriously.

Steve Sacchitelli


Email from Nikki Dawson:

Please see below. This is an appeal from an Interim Board Member at the Liberty Humane Society in Jersey City. Permission to cross-post

Three weeks ago, I was sitting in a crowded room listening to the Liberty Humane Society's then-president John O'Keefe read from a prepared statement. The rest of the five member board looked grim as John stood up and began reading. He announced that the entire board
was resigning, citing pending bankruptcy caused by what he described as a botched attempt at going no-kill, led by the executive director and the group's largest donor, that had led to overcrowding and was bleeding the organization's bank accounts. I knew that without a board, the Liberty Humane Society would be dissolved, taken over by the Attorney General, and the shelter would revert to a 7-day/euth impound facility run by the City of Jersey City's animal control division. Myself, along with two other past presidents of LHS in attendance that night, volunteered to take over as
the new interim board. I had no idea what awaited us.
The conditions at the shelter are...what's the right word? abismal, horrendous, shocking, horrifying, take your pick. It's difficult to put into words what it's like to see 99 dogs crammed into a facility built to comfortably house only 50. What it's like to witnesss 274 cats in a building meant for only 80. Perhaps the best description is a word we in this field know only so well: HOARDER.
The facility is disgusting. The animals are suffering. The smell is powerful, it knocks you over. Cats come in healthy, get sick and die. Kittens drop dead in their cages from panleuk every day. There are only TWO kennel attendants to take care of 99 dogs. Dogs live in cramped cages, that spend 23 1/2 hours in cages where they can't stand up or turn around, can't stretch their limbs, where they can't get away from their own filth. Their noses are rubbed raw and bloody and many have split pads from getting their feet caught in the wire pop up cages really meant for cats. And this place calls itself a no-kill shelter.
Our goal on this interim board is to end the suffering. But we can't do it alone. We have embarked on an aggressive campaign to get dogs evaluated, vaxed, s/n, and then placed. Placed in foster homes, adopted, or picked up by rescues or other shelters. That's where you come in. Please consider opening your doors and your hearts to a dog that did nothing wrong except end up in a facility where the humans made lots of mistakes. This situation is not the result of people who didn't care, it's the result of people who cared too much. But the animals are paying the price. Won't you help save one of our dogs?
We have so many nice, healthy, adoptable dogs that deserve a chance at a new life. Please help us, the interim board, make some badly needed changes. We can fix this; it is within our grasp. But we can't do it without your help. Won't you -- can't you -- find a place, just one place, for one of our dogs? Every day that goes by is a day that you
could help end the suffering and give one of our animals a chance at happiness.

i dont know if the questions directed at me are rhetorical or not but yes, i have personally seen many dog evaluations at LHS as recent as last weekend. none have ever involved another dog in any way.

personally, i do think that humane euthanasia for unadoptable animals living in the current conditions at LHS right now is acceptable.

somehow, i dont think you really wanted to hear my opinion. stop your coffe clutch bitch sessions and go down there and maybe help the staff clean, it'd make much more of an impact.

for the person who made the accusations about the 2 dog evaluations, who did you see performing these evaluations? post thier name here.

Wow. What a mess of a thread. But hamiltonparkjc is right. If you're gonna post this kind of accusation (1st post at that) you gotta back it up. Is the reason you didn't post on the other thread is cause Webbie said you had to post your name and affiliation?

This is so upsetting I could not wait to reply. Thus to be clear this is my reply and not a statement from the HAA board.

The evaluations are being done in association with the ASPCA and St Huberts, who have been actually sending in teams to both do evaluations and train staff and volunteers on evaluations. The guiding scale being used is the scale adopted in California's recent No Kill law.

It is really time for CatWoman and LHS_Volunteer to peddle their awfully harmful lies elsewhere. To preach with near zealotry the methodology of Nathan Winograd for establishing a No Kill shelter, and then actively pursue No Kill at LHS without following the requirements he lays out in his writings, you should be particularly ashamed of yourselves.

Here is what was found in the shelter as soon as the new Board was able to have people go in and take a look around - no separation of healthy animals from sick animals, Dogs in cat cages not even able to stand up, animals that had been evaluated 3 or 4 times while others had been there months without any evaluation, kennels close to and facing each other which breeds aggression and is not allowed in any decent shelter, an animal with an open cancer wound untreated, an animal that has been diagnosed with parvo months earlier but received only one of his prescribed medical treatments, and an official animal log that showed 17 fewer dogs than were actually in the shelter.

THIS is the legacy that so many who are screaming about the evils of the new management left behind. Long time animal workers were moved to tears when they went in and saw what had become of a shelter that many of them, advocates, shelter operators, rescue workers, and behaviorists had been in a year before and seen something entirely different. Your belief that allowing an animal to essentially be tortured is justifiable because you are practicing No Kill is disgusting. That these animals were living in many of the same conditions that you called inhumane when it happened at HCSPCA but became business as usual for you when it was you making the calls is the ultimate in self-delusion and hypocrisy.

The truth is simple and basic, no matter what sides you want to take on "Kill" Vs "No Kill". Before the regime that was removed a month ago started, the shelter had a clean bill of health and was consistently lowering euthanasia rates quarter after quarter. After you took over, euthanasia was replaced by torture and the shelter fell into such disarray that it is taking an army to keep it from going under. If it goes under and becomes a seven-day and out kill pound as a result, the blame for those deaths will lie entirely at your feet, and not at those who are trying desperately to undo the phenomenal damage you have wrought.

So go ahead and call me and those who are trying to save LHS whatever vile, loathsome and untrue things you want to. I am used to it by now, as I am sure the others are as well. No amount of screaming and anger on your part can change the fact that this all happened on YOUR watch.

Your argument from ignorance is less than convincing. You're the one making specific claims with zero evidence. Back it up.

So if LHS has nothing to hide, I agree, why don't they post all that were euthanized with the reasons why and how exactly they were tested. But of course they will do nothing but lie as we can obviously see based on how it's been going since the last board meeting. It was said then that their goal was 40 more dogs and they denied that but it certainly looks like thats the path they are taking.

PHDOG are you at Liberty viewing these evaluations and know first hand that they are not putting these dogs down or are you involved with someone there that's doing the killing and therefore don't see anything wrong with it.
We are all aware and have first hand information from within LHS that 12 dogs were put down and another 32 are going down this week. I think LHS should post the dogs that they euthanized and the reason behind each decision. Maybe David Norman and John H should spend some time with each dog before they euthanize them and then tell us if it's justified.
Something has to be done to stop this. There is a board meeting tomorrow night 7 p.m. at City Hall and people who are outraged by what is going on at LHS please come and support the rights of these animals who need our voice to save them.

http://jclist.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=237058

http://media.nj.com/hudsoncountynow_i ... a6a9cb9789b5be3_large.jpg

http://blog.dogsbite.org/2010/02/pet- ... hes-explosive-attack.html

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2401132/posts

http://www.nj.com/bayonne/index.ssf/2 ... lter_manager_70-year.html


I don't a shit if you don't like the test standards. I wonder which irresponsible person allowed the above dogs to be adopted. If I were the above owners and I could prove where these dogs came from, I would sue the shelter.

More like the animal nuts have their heads in the sand.

Webmaster put the last LHS thread out of its misery by requiring that those spreading rumors do so under their own names.

I suggest that it would be useful in this thread as well.

So many new posters... So little time.

Love to know how few IPs belong to how many sock puppets.

So were those dogs put down or not? I heard one of them had someone interested in him and yet he was put down and not released to be adopted out!
So what was the criteria? Why were those dogs put down today?

Are you denying that?

The other funny part of this is the statement is referring to "passing a resolution...." There has not been a board meeting for a resolution to be passed!!!!!

how come every dog that is adoptable at LHS a pitbull? please stop euthanizing the other breeds!

If I put one bowl of food out in front of two of my cats there would be a fight. Who came up with this "test"?

the only lies here are the ones you are telling. LHS does not now and has never performed evaluations in the manner you describe.

Under no circumstances would any animal be euthanized that had potential adopters aside from aggression or serious illness and in either of those cases, those dogs would not be presented to the public as options for adoption.

take your BS elsewhere.

This is a plea for help for the many pit bulls, pit mixes, and other dogs at Liberty Humane Society located across from Liberty Science Center in Jersey City.

Recently the interim LHS Board of Trustees passed a resolution capping the number of dogs they will house to 40. This was to be done via adoptions, fosters and rescues. There was no talk of killing these innocent animals.

Last week the board authorized the killing of 10 pit bulls, four more this morning and as I write this letter more are being killed.

The evaluation method they are using to decide whether a pit bull will be killed or not in order to meet their quota is to place a bowl of food outside of the dog's cage with another pit bull standing next to the bowl. They then open the cage of the animal under evaluation - if the dogs act aggressive to one another the animal has failed evaluation and will be killed. Anyone who is familiar with dogs knows that this test would result in a failure for almost every animal.

The animals being slated for killing include pit bulls who had 2 or more families requesting to adopt them. A rescue group visited the shelter yesterday and was recommended not to rescue a particularly friendly puppy because there were several people interested in the dog; he was evaluated and did not pass this sick test and will now be killed sometime soon instead of being adopted.

If you are as horrified by these actions as I am there is a way you can help. Please contact the following councilmen with Jersey City and tell them that you are opposed to what is happening at the Liberty Humane Society. There are many people out there willing to adopt and rescue these animals if they are given the chance but the board at LHS is moving extremely quickly to euthanize the dogs before anyone has a chance to step up and rescue them.

Harry Melendez - 201-547-6800 , HarryM@JCNJ.ORG
Steve Fulop - 201-547-5315 , FulopS@JCNG.ORG

To contact the board of directors of the Liberty Humane Society email them at BOARD@LibertyHumane.org

This is a bloodbath and these dogs need help!!

Quote:

This information is available at the monthly board meetings which are always announced. The next board meeting is tomorrow night, Tuesday, August 17, 2010, 7:00 pm at City Hall.

Anyone wishing to speak, they are to e-mail board@libertyhumane.org.

If you want your questions answered, you may have to put forth a little bit of an effort.

Thanks catsndogs, but I would like to see line to line items on what the money is being actually being spent on. I would like to see how the money is actually being drawing from the account, you know like if we were balancing our checkbook. It's that simple.

Now that you mentioned it, how much does the city pays the shelter?

Maybe that could be the cause of the problem, but before we could go there don't we needed to see how the money is being used.

The annual budget is now about $1 million.

This is the income breakdown based on the Oct Annual Report

Single Foundation: 22% ?

Donations/Grants: 33% ?

City Contract(s): 44% ?

Other Services: < 2% -

Salaries account for half of the budget. There are about 19 people on staff but now without the Dev Director. The ED had been paid by a grant separate from the budget.

The City of JErsey City has to start paying more into the pot. The $1.50 per capitia it currently pays will keep the shelter at poverty level. THe contract is up for renewal this Nov.

I would have to agree with Xerxes considering that the shelter is overcrowded with animals that at this point they should be given them away. Also I would like to know what is the total annual expense at LHS?

I want to see line for line expenses not this annual report that doesn't break it down for me. If we could see where and exactly how our money is being spent it will most certainly brighten the spotlight on exactly what is going on down there besides dogs and cats being jammed into dirty cages.

Greenvillechick,

There are many animal welfare conferences that actually feel that $175 is not high enough. But your reasons make sense.

Xerxes,
I believe that information would be on the annual report. Just curious though, how would the answer to that question help you? Animal welfare staff in general usually get low pay to begin with.

And I ask again, and maybe eventually someone will answer: What is the total annual salary expense at LHS? Is it CONCEIVABLE that nobody knows the answer to this question?

If nobody knows, then it is impossible to talk about how to run the shelter.

(I wish LHS well on it's adoption drive...I'd take a cat if I thought I could handle eventually burying another one.)

I think having the free adoption events is one of the best ideas at LHS. In Manhattan the adoption fees are, I believe 60 for a mixed breed and 100 for a pure bred or puppy under 1 year. I think 175 fee definitely does deter a lot of people from adopting from Liberty. If I was looking to add to my brood I would either go to Manhattan or wait for another event at LHS. I understand that it costs to run a shelter but John made an excellent point that it also costs to keep that dog. I always thought Liberty's adoption fees were steep considering the high percentages of bully dogs, I think by charging a lesser fee and having the adoption events it would greatly benefit the shelter. Of course I am no expert and everyone has their own opinion but if I was looking to adopt I would definately skip right over that 175 fee and head to Manhattan to save a dog who probablly has less time left

Quote:

Another way to look at it is that once the cat or dog is adopted out, there is not longer a cost for LHS associated with that pet. So if a pet would have been there lets say a year or longer without the promotion, a free pet is actually a savings.

Rest assured though, potential adopters go through the same application process whether if there is a fee or not.

Income from adoptions is a small amount overall compared to other income (JC Contract, Hoboken contract, donations, Wellness clinic) but every little bit helps.

However, we did a "free" cat adoption event in May and June which was promoted everywhere including the leaderboard on this List. Over 100 cats were adopted and adoption income stayed the same as last year. It has been proved that when you offer something free, income comes in other ways so there really is no loss or substantial loss in doing free promotions.

Keep watch on the list, we are planning many more promotions throughout the rest of the year. We are also planning another adoptathon Pets-apalooza in September as we did in June when all adult cats and dog adoptions fro the two day event were free. We got 37 dogs and cats adopted at the June adoptathon.

Would you like to join the Marketing/PR committee? We can use all the creativity and help we can get.


Quote:

In a perfect world, sure. But in this world, they have no money for the most basic things (food, litter, etc) at times. Just consider it a donation for the service they provide. A very valuable service that lots of great and dedicated people volunteer a lot of time and energy to.

Even after shelling out $1000, your first visit to a vet with your mall puppy will cost more.

Maybe my perspective on the issue is wrong, but why, if the major problems at the organization stem from the basic dichotomy TO KILL, or NOT TO KILL based on the inability to house too many animals, are not the animals given to suitable petlovers totally free. Perhaps even with a couple free cans of pet food.

If the goal is to have fewer animals in captivity, giving them away seems to make sense... to me anyway.

Again, unless all the money goes to salaries and there are people in it for the money, then giving away pets makes sense. Someone might take in a stray for free who would not for $100 and that might be one less animal at the pound.

Today and tomorrow, August 14 and 15, 12noon-6pm.

Our Adoption Fees are SLASHED this weekend:

Adopt ONE DOG, any breed, any age, $100.
This is a $75 savings.

Adopt TWO Companion PITBULLS for the same $100!!

Adopt ONE CAT, any breed, any age, $70.
This is a $50 savings.

Adopt TWO CATS for the price of one, the same $70 for two cats!!

Each adopter receives a coupon for 50% off of our Wellness Services for 6 months.

LIBERTY HUMANE SOCIETY is located at 235 Jersey City Boulevard in Liberty State Park near the LSP Light Rail Station and the Liberty Science Center.

Liberty Humane Society
201.547.4147

ADOPT . VOLUNTEER . DONATE

Thank you!

when the going gets tough, the board gets going!

I also find it interesting that when we shut down a shelter that was cruel we were a real watchdog in your eyes, but now that we are fundraising and providing rescue services for a shelter that you support, we are sly, devious, and one sided simply because the people we are working with are not the people who you personally believe should be running the shelter. Perhaps you are simply unaware that we made the same offer to help find rescue groups and fundraise to the previous management and they rejected it? I would find that surprising, since one of those times was at a meeting the previous management called of animal advocacy groups at which you sat next to me as I made the offer.

While I appreciate the praise for HAA's past endeavors, the only thing here that is disingenuous is your reply. If you stick by your earlier claim about hospitality than why does your previous post state that JCList is the appropriate forum? You also talk about not saying anything until the staff changed and mention this as a crosspost from JCList, but the original statement was sent BEFORE the management change TO DOGJC FIRST. Again, as I have stated before, you rejected it with no explanation. You still, after all of this time, refuse to tell us what in the statement is inaccurate. You seem to think we are playing a game of gotcha when we have REPEATEDLY asked you this question for one reason only, to make sure we didn't get anything wrong. To not want to answer that question or to feel you can't is one thing. To not even do me the courtesy of a reply email when I have never failed to reply to anything either of you have ever asked me is beyond my ability to understand.

My apology over the whole black/white list issue was sincere. It was sincere when I made it In private and it was sincere when at your request I made it publicly and strongly on DOGJC.

As for the personal attacks against me, I disagree that is because of the tone of the original statement. While I know my tone can be snarky and confrontational at times, that statement was written by three people and reviewed by three others from various viewpoints of this issue before being sent out. Of those who have engaged in reasonable discussion of the statement, both agreeing and disagreeing with it, all are also DOGJC members. With one exception, every message that has attacked me personally or HAA in general and told what you know to be lies are NOT DOGJC members. This just strengthens my point that what should have and could have been in a civil discussion specifically aimed at ending rumors and helping LHS devolved into what it became here precisely BECAUSE you did not allow this conversation to take place on DOGJC, where it belonged.