3

Robert Miller and RCDAS preying on low-income residents of Indio

Last night the Indio community forum was put on (by volunteers, Coachella Animal Network) to discuss the tactics being used against residents (and their dogs) by the Riverside County animal control department. About 120 people came out, many of them with citations that ranged from $400-$2,000+. Riverside County are now denying that these citations exist, even while they do exist. Shelter director Robert Miller said that he didn’t come because he “wasn’t invited,” even though he WAS invited. Anyone from the department could have come, it was encouraged. Also, all of the current Riverside Board of Supervisors were invited, yet none of them came. All of the current Indio City Council members were invited, a Council that blindly subjected their own residents to laws that they were totally unaware of, yet only 1 of them came. Silence is a stance.

On a positive note: Assemblyman Manuel Perez, who is running for Supervisor Benoit’s seat, did send numerous representatives who stayed for the entire meeting. He has continued to show a track record of engagement on this issue, and if you are a voter in this area I’d suggest voting for him in June.

Back to the forum, Kim and Marla put forth a great platform for residents to come forward and I applaud all who did. Many of the testimonials were downright horrifying, and numerous folks have not only lost pets but are now ending up in collections over the fines. Thank you each for having the courage to oppose something that is wrong.

Upon getting home I saw that Riverside County spokesperson John Welsh stated on camera from his office that the residents won’t have to pay the amounts on the citations. His exact quote…

That dollar amount that folks are seeing is not what folks are going to have to pay, it’s essentially the amount they’ll pay if they fail to comply.

^Semantically true, but incredibly disingenuous and smattered with layers of bullshit. Here’s just some of the things that he is failing to say…

1) That they are only targeting low-income and poverty stricken areas.
2) That there are little to no genuinely low-cost or free resources available.
3) That they are giving you a 20 day window to “comply,” no matter how many animals you may have.
4) That the one shelter-promoted clinic that they suggest is actually not low-cost and couldn’t get you in within 20 days, even if you called yesterday for an appointment.
5) That none of the citations being given out are in Spanish, and nothing on the website is in Spanish, even as Indio is close to 70% Hispanic.
6) That the residents being cited had no prior knowledge of this law even existing, so they became automatically in violation of something and were thus immediately treated like irresponsible criminals by the department.
7) That many residents can’t afford to pay out of pocket for sterilization/rabies/microchip/license, which, when going the few routes that are available to them now could cost more than $300 per dog. That’s ignoring the existence of a 20 day window, which makes “complying” impossible out of the gate.
8) That you must pay the citation if you miss the 20 day window, and will actually be taken to collections for it.
9) That animal control officers are violating the 4th and 14th Amendments when they trespass and discard due process.
10) That officers are writing citations for dogs that they aren’t even visibly seeing, and citing residents for things that they couldn’t possibly know, especially when not communicating with the pet owners.
11) That people are being threatened with the fines doubling if AC have to ambiguously “come back,” and that could mean at any time.
12) That they are offering to kill the pets for a $25 fee, violating the Hayden Act, but then still sticking the owner with the citation amount even after they get rid of the dog/dogs.
This list could go on and on…

And last, to further expand on Robert Miller evading the meeting: The only reason Robert Miller didn’t come is because he would have had to face the people that his department has been harassing, coupled with the fact that he would have had to LISTEN to them speak instead of just being given the opportunity to grandstand and bloviate in front of a podium. He only wants comfortable environments where the crowd is controlled and aligned with his positions/tactics, otherwise he is a chickenshit. That’s what he should have told the news. He’s a liar and a dog-killing, Pit Bull-discriminating, non-affluent-profiling piece of work that makes at least $15,000 a month as the head of their “animal (out of) control” department.

3 Responses so far.

  1. Someone necessarily assist to make severely posts I’d state.
    This is the first time I frequented your web
    page and up to now? I surprised with the analysis you
    made to create this particular put up incredible.
    Fantastic job!

  2. […] I’ve saw animal-related issues and the many purported solutions to some of those issues directly intersect with poverty, lack of education, and lack of access. If you want to solve these problems then you cannot ignore or condescend this issue. As I learn I’ve tried to include what I’ve learned into my writings. Many times I learn by directly seeing it play out in front of my face. When these topics are touched on there is oftentimes a heavy level of judgment that comes out of the woodwork. I think my first dose of being directly thrown into this kind of a fire/backlash was when I tried to partially defend a man who had his home raided by Scotlund Haisley and Animal Rescue Corps. It’s a whole new world when emotions come unhinged. Being the moderator of my SwayLove Facebook page I see all kinds of commentary that falls into this wheelhouse of judgement, and in December I wrote about it in a way that took on the hypocrisy of being an advocate for a portion of something while you are out possibly being really cruel to another portion of something else. Then there was the online fallout behind the Karma Rescue fiasco, which saw someone’s dog get rehomed after its owner came forward to try and get her dog back. Do you fight BSL (breed-specific legislation)? Well, if you do then you will find these many issues front and center with any desire to profile or target certain dogs, because the profiling goes beyond the dogs. And in May I met with and witnessed the testimonies of many good-hearted folks who are trying to do the right thing but are coming up against a backwards mechanism that directly feeds off of this problem. […]

  3. Undeniably believe that that you said. Your favorite reason seemed to be on the internet
    the simplest thing to bear in mind of. I say to you,
    I definitely get annoyed at the same time as other people
    consider issues that they just do not understand about. You managed to hit the nail upon the
    highest and also defined out the whole thing with no need side effect ,
    other people could take a signal. Will likely be back to get more.
    Thank you

Leave a Reply