Yesterday I attended the town hall that was put on by the Los Angeles Animal Services (LAAS) General Manager, Brenda Barnette. This was regarding the confusion over the leaked changes being made to the New Hope coordinator positions. I admittedly know less about the city side, in comparison to county, but wanted to attend anyways because I have numerous friends that seem to be on both sides of the issue. People have been up in arms for days over these changes, and what got my attention was some of the attempts at justifying why what was being done is being done. Barnette perplexingly took public comments BEFORE laying out her version of the proposed plans, a move which made absolutely no sense to me, and still doesn’t. People were furious, and confused, and that doesn’t make for a good mix.

^Here is 80+ minutes of audio. I began recording AFTER the initial public comments, many of which were very good. I apologize for the poor audio quality, I’d arrived late and was stuck at the back of the room…

Anyways, some of the things that were said by Barnette kind of rubbed me the wrong way. She explained away the fact that on 5/1, the very day that these changes were to go into affect, that the coordinators phone lines were coincidentally down because of a “glitch in the system.” I don’t know, I certainly don’t buy that. Another thing that she said (in response to certain rescuer’s passionate pleas of support for their coordinators) was to compare these specific New Hope folks to “personalized shoppers.” To me, that was kind of trivializing genuine relationships (and expected levels of proven compassion) that have been established over a certain extended period of time. To think that that will be seamlessly swapped out is a bit farfetched, and that kind of stuff DOES matter. And why didn’t she meet with the actual New Hope coordinators individually, or as a group, prior to assessing the worthiness of the position? They were apparently totally out of the loop. That seems beyond odd… But most notable, for me, was her poorly framed comments about Pit Bulls. For instance, when Barnette was speaking about Best Friends and referencing their newly pulled animals from last weekend’s Super Adoption, she said this… “They might have a lot of really cute ones up there now. The last time that I was there they just had a lot of Pit Bulls.” Tone missing for added effect. Minutes later she followed that up with, “The last thing we need is more Pit Bulls.” This seems to mirror some of the comments coming from others on the inside, one being a quote that a recent article attributed to a “key source”…

The adoptions from the Best Friends shelter have been less than stellar … and I think that is because the agreement only allows them to take the “leftovers” … meaning animals that are not adopted by the public or taken by rescue groups … so that means they are left with a whole lot of Pit Bulls, Chihuahuas and tabby cats … making it more difficult for rescues to get animals out of the shelter would leave more “desirable” animals to go to Best Friends and thus improve their adoption numbers to justify a private group taking more responsibility by doing better.

^Now I don’t know who said that, but what I do know is that it’s not a very fair comment. I don’t personally have an opinion on the behind the scenes dynamics regarding LAAS and Best Friends. But this quote insinuates that there is some shenanigans going on, which again, I don’t cosign. My whole thing is, isn’t one of the pillars of the problem HOW PIT BULLS ARE ACTIVELY PERCEIVED BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC?? So when the people in the positions to bring forth this NKLA movement are deeming them as “undesirable,” well, that does a certain level of irreparable harm in and of itself. In my opinion, if they do legitimately intend to get to “No Kill,” they’re going to have to find a way to genuinely translate the many wonderful truths and attributes of Pit Bulls over to the indoctrinated portion of the public, instead of speaking (and feeling) of them as if they are 2nd class (dog) citizens… Because the reality is, Pit Bulls aren’t going anywhere, nor should they ever have to go anywhere. This should be a multifaceted effort that started yesterday. At the same time: If this last quote is in any way prophetic, it would imply that rescue groups are being shouldered out so that more “adoptable” dogs can make their way to the privatized shelter(s), which would then also imply that many of the “unadoptable” dogs (i.e. Pit Bulls, Chihuahuas) would continue to be funneled down to the remaining kill shelters, possibly at a more egregious rate. I say egregious because the dynamic between “privatized” and “public” shelters may soon shift… That would leave less public space for more “unadoptable” types, and yet the rates of intake aren’t declining… Again, I’m not saying this is what is going to happen. I’m just speaking as if whomever stated that quote knows something that we don’t. Time will certainly tell…

Lastly, I want to give credit where credit is due… At least Brenda Barnette held something like this. It was intense at times, and she stood in and faced the firing squad people and heard their concerns (whether she listened is still up for debate). All I know is that Marcia Mayeda (from LA County) would never hold anything like this. So for that, Barnette gets commended from me…