CONTROLLING PUBLIC RECORDS
To: County Counsel Jenny Morf
Legal Aide Officer Michelle Luckey
Cecilia Johnson, Director of Community Services
I am unable to make the public records requests that are due this week because on September 19 when you responded to part of the long delayed August 15 electronic public records requests you included no current inventory. The September 12, 2006 requests remain outstanding. They also included a request for a current inventory from which citizens' needs are identified.
As you know, every public records requests (every one) includes a request for the current inventory for the day of production along with the collateral information itemized for each animal status report. The same once weekly then biweekly public records requests have been made and honored for years until you took over records production in May. By manipulating and delaying production you have successfully interrupted our efforts to help this county's citizens. Officer Lindi Mantifel whose work responsibilities were far heavier than yours produced these timely and accurately.
Meanwhile the public records requests for September 12, 2006, sit on the shelf gathering dust. Long after their date of usefulness records may or may not be sent if they are sent at all, always with a huge bill threatening "consequences" /sanctions if your extraordinary bill is not paid immediately. I always have.
The reason you have taken control of records is embarrassingly transparent. It has entirely to do with complicity with this agency's need and desire to seek cover by destroying public records access. All volunteer efforts that are not under Michael Oswald's "control" are viewed by him as "interference with his work." The secrecy desired has to do with rejection of the public's agenda and the public's discovery of this failure. With an adoption rate that has plummeted by half and a kill rate that has nearly doubled in three years I should think help would be wanted not evidence concealed. Uniform reports from citizens of coercion, inaccurate entries on their records or the omission of important exculpatory information would normally cause government to investigate not conceal. Charging huge fees while working to undermine has always been one of Michael Oswald's dishonest tactics.
What are Multnomah Government County sanctions for unethical dishonest conduct by county employees? Where does one file that complaint?
Attorney Robert Babcock will be responding to your correspondence "excusing" the constant systematic delays, omissions and dodges that have virtually destroyed our public service volunteer work.
Meanwhile as MCAS's public records designee how do you suggest I proceed with current records requests when you have failed to provide/withheld the requested data base I use to make these?
Please advise.
Sincerely,
Gail O'Connell-Babcock, Ph.D.,
Citizens for Humane Animal Legislation/Watchdog
16004 SW Tualatin-Sherwood Road, Box 508
Sherwood, OR 97140
503.625.4563; Fax: 503.925.8299
USING PUBLIC RECORDS TO RETALIATE:UNETHCAL BEHAVIOR AND FEE GOUGING
To: County Counsel Morf
To: Legal Aide Officer Michelle Luckey
Multnomah County Government
Your control and use of limits on electronic public records access to punish and gouge is transparent. Time sensitive records requested on August 15 were produced September 21, long after any period of usefulness. This delay was compounded by the false claim that these records had already been produced. Your charge for this delayed material was $101.27, far more than the cost when I did my own inspection, and at least twice what retired legal Aide Officer Mantifel charged for a two day turn around.
The inventories for that date (August 15, 2006) have never been produced. The other records requested were time sensitive in July. You demand timely payment and threaten "consequences" despite the fact that I have always paid timely but impose no ethical business standards upon yourselves, employees of Multnomah County government.
Continuing the practice of unethical business practices, you also charged nearly 8 dollars ($7.79) for "correcting" errors you made on four addresses I had already paid for, correspondence that was returned in the mail. No, these were not "address change" requests as you handily labeled these. These were errors made by you in your public records. The only new information you provided among these 4 addresses was to correct a mistake your officer made in recording a citizen's address on a Notice of Infraction. The Post Office helped me with that correction. You were too late. All the other addresses were listed "no change; all we have." If you were a corporation not a government agency, you would go out of business.
The practice of charging for correcting your own errors is not only unethical, it is also price gouging. Before you hid behind the "security"curtain, I could and did access addresses, each one in less than a minute even on an ancient computer. You ought to correct your own errors for free. Finally these controls and obstructions apply only to me. I personally know citizens who call the agency, request information and are provided this for free.
Should government employees be using their public position to retaliate against their critics?
You still have not responded fully to our September 12 Records Requests. It is now September 24, 2006. You have provided nothing for three weeks. It is simply false that you must control electronic public records because of "security risks." Job security maybe, "government national security secrets," No.
Dogs have died. People have been hurt. Taxpayers are funding your obstructive behaviors. You have lost all sight of what public service means.
Sincerely,
Gail O'Connell-Babcock, Ph.D.,
Citizens for Humane Animal Legislation/Watchdog
16004 SW Tualatin-Sherwood Road, Box 508
Sherwood, OR 97140
503.625.4563; Fax 503.925.8299
Attached Message
From:Gocbwatchdog@aol.com
To:rbabcock@wallaceklormann.com; Michelle.luckey@co.multnomah.or.us;
jenny.m.morf@co.multnomah.or.us
Subject:Public Records: September 12, 2006
Date:Tue, 12 Sep 2006 11:59 AM
Gail O'Connell-Babcock, Ph.D.,
Citizens for Humane Animal Legislation/Watchdog
16004 SW Tualatin-Sherwood Road
Box 508
Sherwood, Oregon 97140
Telephone: (503) 625-4563; FAX: (503) 925-8299
e-mail:gocbwatchdog@aol.com
September 12, 2006
Public Records
To: Legal Aide Officer Michelle Luckey
Following are public records requests for September 12, also sent by certified mail. Included are requests for correct addresses for returned mail from previous public records provided by the agency. Could you send the corrected addresses for these already purchased records by Fax as they are under 10 pages, and now returned are extremely time sensitive.
Thank you.
Gail O'Connell-Babcock
Returned mail:
1. Sarah Erickson
7237 SE Mitchell Court #25, Portland, OR 97206. Reason for
non-delivery: "not deliverable as addressed."
2. Steven and Kristina Dorton, ( quarantine notice)
512 NE 190th, Portland, OR 97230. Reason for non-delivery: "not
deliverable
as addressed."
3. Jamison Emerson
9424 Tyler Street, Portland, OR 97203. Reason for non-delivery: " not
deliverable as addressed."
4. John Harold (Notice of Infraction: 64849)
1337 SE 183rd, Gresham, OR 97030. Reason for non-delivery: " no such
number."
cc: Robert Babcock
cc: County Counsel Jenny Morf
A PARANOID STATE: MCAS, THE PENTAGON OR A POUND?
Prologue
Director of Multnomah County Animal Control Michael Oswald's government signature is his abuse of power. His only "negotiation" tool is force. Public criticisms of agency practices are viewed as crimes against the state: transgressions or threats to his "authority" and his power.
Whether it is a companion animal or public records, his response is always the same: take forceful unilateral control; once "in control," leverage fines/fees to extort consent or surrender. By using purposeful delays and excessive fees, he renders public records unaffordable and too late to be useful. By taking citizens animals hostage when other solutions exist, then leveraging fines (NO DEFERMENTS; CASH UPFRONT ONLY) he forces surrender.
For example, the owner of a companion dog alleged to have killed a cat, must automatically pay over $550.00 in fines: a $200 dollar fine for the infraction; an $150.00 annual potentially dangerous dog registration fee; at least a $50.00 impoundment fee along with $15.00 daily board. A muzzle and a topped cement based kennel in which the dog must be kept at all times when outside are automatic requirements. The house must bear a numbered sign noting that the dog is "Potentially Dangerous" when almost always all that has happened is a preventable incident not the harboring of a "dangerous" pet. Unable to afford the agency's rigid nonnegotiable demands, and anxious about unfair stigmatization, many give up. It is a practice best summarized as "Your money, or your dog's life."
Offers of help are blocked. MCAS frequently delays our receipt of copies of Notices of Infraction and Animal Status Reports so that we cannot offer pro bono legal assistance timely. They now forbid access to all public electronic records, the format in which almost all records are now kept, to all citizens alleging "security risks" ( Lawsuits regarding the prohibition of direct access to records are pending).
In their biased hearings process, complainants, regardless of merit, are represented by the county for free. All others, regardless of merit must find their own way. Defendants are deprived of options by the agency's rigid policies and are deprived of the knowledge that pro bono legal aid is available. MCAS deliberately stacks the deck against its citizens who pay this agency's staff salaries.
When surrendered to the county after citizens are deprived of options, the dog is almost always killed by MCAS if it comes with a Notice of Infraction designation (no need to "test," Level 4) There is also the peculiar practice of adding "apples and oranges" resulting in automatic death sentences. For example, a Pit bull who has scored perfectly on the agency's arbitrary temperament test, Tier 1, will automatically lose his/her life if this is accompanied by a Level 1 Infraction (minor nuisance i.e. barked at someone while at large) because 1 plus 1 is 2. All pit bulls are automatically killed according to the agency's arbitrary "rules" if they score Tier 2, with virtually no exceptions allowed. This score, however, allows all other breeds to go to adoptions or rescue. It is a built in method of "eliminating" the breed while announcing that MCAS has no breed bans, a ban the public in all likelihood would not condone.
Forcibly depriving citizens of their rights and killing as an "efficient" solution are Michael Oswald's enforcement "tools." It is tolerated as part of the general decline in accountability in Multnomah County government. Years of neglect have taken a toll on democracy.
What follows is only one example of the harm done by MCAS's withholding public records as punishment for the crime of reporting on these trends.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
---------------------
Subj: Public Records
Date: 8/25/06 9:32:36 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From: Gocbwatchdog
To: jenny.m.morf@co.multnomah.or.us
CC: rbabcock@wallaceklormann.com
CC: serena.m.cruz@co.multnomah.or.us
CC: district1@co.multnomah.or.us
CC: mult.chair@co.multnomah.or.us
CC: lonnie.j.roberts@co.multnomah.or.us
CC: Michelle.luckey@co.multnomah.or.us
CC: cecilia.johnson@co.multnomah.or.us
CC: lisa.h.naito@co.multnomah.or.us
Gail O'Connell-Babcock, Ph.D.,
Citizens for Humane Animal Legislation/Watchdog
16004 SW Tualatin-Sherwood Road
Box 508
Sherwood, Oregon 97140
Telephone: (503) 625-4563; FAX: (503) 925-8299
e-mail:gocbwatchdog@aol.com
August 25.2006
Jenny Morf, Assistant County Attorney
MCAS Public Records designee
Office of Multnomah County Attorney
501 SE Hawthorne, Suite 500
Portland, Oregon 97214
Fax: 503.988.3377
cc: Robert Babcock
cc:Legal Aide Officer Michelle Luckey
cc: Cecilia Johnson, Director, Department of Community Services
cc: Multnomah County Commission
Public Records
Ms. Morf:
On August 20 2006 I asked about the status of Mr. Valentine's dog, Skyler, impounded at MCAS following Mr. Valentine's emergency hospitalization. Mr. Valentine, a disabled veteran, is/was hospitalized at the Veteran's hospital and the last information indicated he was in serious condition. Any requests for updates from MCAS are answered randomly and usually too late by weeks, even a month. This seemed an urgent matter deserving immediate attention. This was the note on record at MCAS for animal status id 414428. Since MCAS has killed animals with protective custody designations in the past, it is important.
staff note: "Tuesday, August 08, 2006, Nurse (I forgot her name) called from VA hospital and said Mr. Valentine took a turn for the worse and can't come get dog today as planned. I told her we are only holding dog thru the 14th and that every day it is $15 a day. She said she would keep us posted as to his condition. Right now Mr. Valentine has no one that can come p/u dog for him."
The agency gave Mr. Valentine an ultimatum to remove his dog, while he could not as his condition was deteriorating. He knew no one who could help him. I asked you what his status was because I both have volunteers, low cost kennels, foster homes and a rescue who could help him.
You never responded, once again. And once again, I am asking for a timely response. This, once again, confirms that you withhold time sensitive information, refuse to provide timely requested information that has already been paid for (then provide it too late and charge again) and in every possible way control public records access for the purpose of retaliation. Any review of your " Guiding Principles And Leadership Expectations" (March 21,2003), MCAS's alleged ethical guidelines for public service, demonstrate that once again these guidelines are only intended as false propaganda. The agency operates behind them as a "cover."
This agency's motives could not be clearer. Multnomah County public employees have confounded their public status with that of a "members only" private club. Interfering with offers of help by public officials simply to demonstrate authoritarian control is a betrayal of the public's trust/agenda. It has no place in legitimate government.
I have asked that MCAS's "Guidelines",(apparently signed by all agency staff), be posted with their topic headings:" Humane treatment of animals; Responsible Animal Ownership...{ the agency's alleged public education programs}...;Quality Customer Service; Community Access and Involvement; Professional Excellence and Personal Integrity; Public Health and Safety; Accountability; Teamwork and Collaboration; Respect; Leadership, Excellence and Continuous Improvement; Adaptable to continuous change."
These can serve as the agency's own standards of accountability by which citizens can judge the reality of their own experiences. Many of these experiences are already on record.
Sincerely,
Gail O'Connell-Babcock
REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION
Ms. Morf:
I counsel Robert Torresdal and Laura Frost, owners of young German Shepherd mix dog, Buster, killed at MCAS on August 24, despite the fact that the owners had met the agency's conditions well before Buster was killed on the 24; and despite the fact that county counsel and MCAS had been notified previous to his killing that a place had been found for Buster. Unfortunately their experience is not uncommon.
I still have no response from anyone in Multnomah County government I can provide this family. I would like a response for their sake and I would like to be able to assure them that this matter was taken seriously and that safeguards are being put into place to prevent this from happening in the future.
Buster's and this family's experience is an example, not a unique event, of "accidental" killings at MCAS. What happened in this case? What is being done to prevent this tragedy from happening to others? When there is never a government response, never a correction, it will happen again. It has and does.
History
Buster's animal status identification number is 454461 for the purpose of government review/investigation. These are the facts. He was killed although both county counsel and the agency were notified that he had a place to go four days before he was destroyed with the false agency record entry "no owner contact."
This is the history. Buster, the young German Shepherd mix belonging to Laura Frost and Robert Torresdal was impounded following a history that was limited to a Level 1 designation: the lowest possible animal control infraction involving an individual's report of upset but no harm while at large. The minor alleged "bite," if it indeed even occurred, was never proven, in fact quite questionable.
But it isn't the dog's behavior that is in question. It is the agency's conduct that is troubling. John Rowton, agency manager, noted in animal status notes on August 24, 2006 something that simply wasn't true: " No contact from owners placed on er JMR."
That is simply false. Mr. Torresdal and Ms. Frost had been working to find a place that MCAS would accept. They are of modest means, had no place that would allow a kennel to be built and Ms. Frost had lost her job. On August 14, they contacted the agency asking what could be done to gain their dog's release and were told that Buddy would only be released to a location with a secure enclosure. They report that they repeatedly called MCAS but no one at MCAS returned their calls (a common citizen complaint meriting review) They worked hard to find a place because Buddy was their constant companion. They engaged Attorney Robert Babcock' s assistance in late July to help. The county knew that.
On the 21st of August, four days before Buddy was destroyed, Robert Babcock e-mailed you that Laura Frost and Robert Torresdal had found an uncle in Spokane who could take Buddy. I assured them of that. Their continued efforts to contact MCAS went unanswered. They called to say that they kept trying and trying to call MCAS but no one called back. That is a long familiar story.
When this agency wants to kill an animal or punish an individual it seems the agency's management dishonestly manipulates the desired outcome and then falsifies the records to cover their tracks. A very common citizen report is that MCAS simply does not return telephone calls then notes in the record : " No owner contact." In short MCAS staff simply chose not to call citizens back. MCAS then omits or revises in records what they don't want revealed. This report is too frequent to be ignored
I am asking for an investigation and a response as part of simple accountability. I have assured this family that their experience is being taken seriously by county government. Would you please look into this? If you are not the correct party to whom this should be addressed, please direct me to that government official. This deserves a response.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Gail O'Connell-Babcock, Ph.D.
HIJACKING PUBLIC RECORDS: MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OREGON
Public Records Production: A Real Disaster, September 21, 2006
Ms. Morf:
Today we finally received the time sensitive public records requested on August 15 along with the bill and completely expired Quarantine notices and Notices of Infractions some produced after the hearings time has expired ( 30 days). This is the first time in 10 years,since you have taken control of records production, that these notices and other public records used to assist the public have been systematically delayed.
Since you denied access to public electronic records in early May for disingenuous "security" reasons ( never demonstrated) with the ironic statement, and I quote you exactly,:" on a different issue, it is clear that the public records kiosk ( an old computer on a rolling cart) is not meeting its intended purpose - i.e. production of public records in a prompt efficient manner", records needed to assist citizens with pro bono legal help and access to other resources have been systematically delayed beyond their date of usefulness. When provided, these are provided at an extortive cost in a transparent effort to destroy our ten year volunteer effort.
What is particularly troubling, Ms. Morf, are the effects of this control. One has to do with the hearings process. You represent complainants on the agency's behalf regardless of merit while defendants are left to fend for themselves. That is why we help them. We help them in an effort to create a level playing field. It is about fair play. By withholding public records including Notices of Infraction until the time is expired or nearly expired (too late to contact citizens) defendants are effectively denied representation. Most defendants cannot afford the high costs of legal counsel provided free by the county to complainants, hence our volunteer involvement. Surely you know this. But when we have brought this to your attention you turn a deaf ear, in fact go out of your way to further confound and complicate delivery. Notices that were once faxed may no longer be faxed because of your and Mr. Oswald's "policy" decision, yet this remains the fastest most efficient way of timely production. What were once standing requests are no longer permitted to be standing requests but must be requested each time and are still not produced timely. Records not requested are produced then payment demanded for what was never requested. Requested records are omitted and then we are told to try again later.
Every subterfuge imaginable has been exercised to stop our volunteer efforts by co-opting and controlling the production of records that are clearly within the public venue. This isn't about the records alone. It is about whose records these are. Michael Oswald's pique, visibly demonstrated in his statement that he doesn't want the public rummaging through his records is disturbing. Seeking information isn't "rummaging" and no honest government official raises this as a concern.
As county counsel you have facilitated and continue to facilitate this conduct. Why? How is interfering with public records access a county counsel public service? There are no security risks involved in accessing records on the Petware system. That is simply a false statement. Occasional cases involve criminal investigations. These very few cases can be and were once easily filtered out on a "read only" data base. Now this is the "excuse" to deny all members of the public all access to electronic public records. Why?
The "security risk" that troubles Michael Oswald is his desire to keep public information secret and to also destroy all community involvement he cannot directly control. It is about job security not national security. There are profound problems at this agency easily documented through records review, not the least of which are the appalling death and adoption rates since he took over as Director three years ago. By denying access to records, these can no longer be documented and he won't post the unvarnished truth. Is the solution for government incompetence and wrong doing to "disappear" the evidence and "ban" the reporter from the country or is it to forthrightly fix the problem? What would honest government do?
What will you be doing as county counsel to honor public service requirements by balancing these real needs against a public employee's private desires? What is going to be done to correct the public records access fiasco? This correspondence will be distributed to others because we are all affected by the conduct of this county government agency. Hopefully this will be corrected soon. This has been going on for 5 months now.
Sincerely,
Gail O'Connell-Babcock, Ph.D.,
Citizens for Humane Animal Legislation/Watchdog
16004 SW Tualatin-Sherwood Road, Box 508
Sherwood, OR 97140
Telephone: 503.625.4563; Fax: 503.925.8299
Byzantine public records production in Multnomah County
The Pentagon or the Pound? First Multnomah County Animal
Control (MCAC)
concealed public records, and then removed all public access.
" In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes an act of rebellion."
August 28, 2006
Jenny Morf, Assistant County Attorney
MCAS Public Records designee
Office of Multnomah County Attorney
501 SE Hawthorne, Suite 500
Portland, Oregon 97214
cc:
Robert
Babcock
cc: Officer Michelle Luckey
Fax: 503.988.3377
Public Records Requests
Ms. Morf:
I am forwarding public records requests for the week of August 28, 2006, necessarily circumscribed because public records requests made two weeks ago for August 15, 2006, have not been received. No Notices of Infraction or quarantine notices have been provided since August 7, three weeks ago. Since these have a very limited time usefulness, the likelihood most are expired is already high. Knowing as you do that these are time sensitive, you also know that these are of little use after the appeal time. I explain to citizens who are upset by this that you control the production schedule in this political matter. Delays mean that animals and citizens whom we could have helped and did in the past get no assistance now. We submit the requests, are charged high rates and get them when you feel like it. Christmas in July is fine for presents, not for time sensitive documents.
I have had to make some adjustments on the August 10, 2006, Invoice. I did not request 74 pages of adoption records. The total number of pages for electronic copies sent in 2 packets was 316. After subtracting the 74 nonrequested adoption pages, the remainder was 242. The remaining 242 pages divided by 316 produced a ratio of 76%. Seventy-six per cent of the total bill of $93.48 is $71.05. The amount is enclosed. I did not include or deduct for random errors of production such as consecutive copies of the same document, or deduct for information requested but not received such as the addresses of owners without which I cannot contact them. I would ask that these be provided as they are paid for (retired Legal Aide Officer Lindi Mantifel always provided immediately by fax what had been purchased but omitted), but under the current regime, they become listed as a 'new" records request and are accompanied by additional charges, along with a confusing billing as if these were "new" requests when in fact they are not.
What is described as "the August 7 Public Records Requests" in the billing were in fact nothing new, not a new request at all, but a delayed response for the addresses of citizens requested but not provided in July 25 packet. The packet received July 25 reflected requests made June 20, 2006, were urgent and time sensitive. I asked on July 31 that omitted information from the July 25 packet be faxed as it was under 10 pages. As noted it was an omission. I asked for these again by fax on August 7 accompanied also by an urgent request for an omitted address from quarantine notices sent the first week of August. Having already paid for this data and receiving incomplete information, I had asked that this be faxed back. It was well under the ten pages and an accepted business practice. I requested this 4 times without a single acknowledgment. Instead this was ignored and produced as a "August 7, 2006, Public Records Request" in the August 10 billing. Not only was it delayed, I was charged twice for information. By now,( animals dead or gone), weeks passed, the information I paid for was useless. I still paid for it as well as for other time expired documents.
There never was any "breech" in security when I accessed electronic "read only" records. However, I did once receive classified information when the agency produced documents. In addition, When retired Legal Aide Officer Lindi Mantifel produced records there was a schedule everyone could count on: at first, every week then every other week, in by Wednesday, ready by Friday. The price was $15.00 an hour not the current rate of $31.16; the information catalogued. Inadvertently omitted information such as missing or illegible addresses was faxed as any professional business would do when items are left out of a business order. By now, under that schedule we would have received 10 sets of records (not the 5 sent whenever) all used to help the public find the resources they need. As you know MCAS does not have a prevention and education program nor does MCAS provide social services to assist owners with the resources they need for compliance.
Taking "control" of records production has nothing to do with "firewalls" or Mr. Oswald's fears of citizens rummaging around in his "personal private" drawers. Those are at home, not at the agency. It does however have everything to do with a deliberate effort to destroy our volunteer program and to keep "secret" that which is well within the public purview.
Please advise me if you would like the 74 adoption records pages faxed so that my description can be confirmed. I am faxing and sending by certified mail, return receipt requested, the current August 28, 2006, requests to Legal Aide Officer Michelle Luckey. I am not asking this time for previously omitted information, just keeping a record of this as I would be charged twice and get these expired. If you or Attorney Robert Babcock would like a copy of the current August 28 requests, please advice me. Sending everyone copies didn't result as I had hoped in improved communication so there seemed little point in continuing that practice.
Sincerely,
Gail O'Connell-Babcock
Sent by fax and by certified mail
DOW HOKOANA INVESTIGATED AND FOUND HERSELF BLAMELESS OF NEGLIGENCE
It is embarassing that someone whose job is to investigate animal abuse and neglect covers up this concern in her own agency with slick excuses. The time spent trying to locate the owners and "examining" a clearly acutely distressed dog should have been spent transporting him to a "real" veterinarian. Prompt intervention could have saved his life. You don't need a microchip to get veterinary help. Anyone, a volunteer, a local vet, could have been called. They just didn't care enough to act.
Most animal control agencies in this area have no standards of accountability; no supervision, no means of redress. The only avenue open is lawsuits so I hope that this family consults an attorney. Clearly there will be no independent investigation here. Geordie Duckler locally is the best known animal lawyer for issues such as these. If unavailable, Reb Babcock has been doing pro bono animal control law for 10 years, mostly enforcement related, however, always pro bono, and would know of other resources.
Ironically, Multnomah County Animal Services has a sign in their parking lot set in cement, ordering citizens to keep stray dogs in their cars until they have checked in, a process that can take as long as 25 minutes on a busy day. There is no covered parking, just a lot on a hill fully exposed to the weather/heat.
When this was brought to their attention as a problem violating their own ordinance (prohibiting citizens from leaving animals in unattended cars), their excuse was that they cover up the sign on 'hot" days, never mind the ordinance. Some distracted employee must sit by the door and decide how hot is too hot, a neat philosophical question (when the animal dies, I guess, another oops!). Even on a balmy day with temperatures in the 70's animals can become distressed in enclosed areas. It is too inconvenient for the staff at MCAS apparently to find other solutions. They too don't care. The sign is still up. They won't be learning from the mistakes of others.
Gail O'Connell-Babcock, Ph.D.,
Citizens for Humane Animal Legislation/Watchdog
16004 SW Tualatin-Sherwood Road, Box 508
Sherwood, OR 97140
503.625.4563
Update: Multnomah County Animal Services still intent on killing Clyde, the Van Vleet's family senior dog
Despite an initial statement by MCAS that they would possibly consider alternatives to killing Clyde, MCAS continues to insist that Clyde is now their dog, subject to their arbitrary will. MCAS has held Clyde for one month in solitary confinement while withholding information from the Van Vleet family that pro bono legal services were available. His fate remains uncertain.
Clyde (agency number 361474) did not "earn" his death sentence. Instead he had the misfortune to encounter Multnomah County Animal Services and its "rules for killing" that have no proven validity, defy common sense, and are without compassion and reasoned judgment.
Clyde is a senior Rottweiler/German Shepherd mix with a stubby tail who has lived his entire life with the Van Vleet family and his Rottweiler companion, Bonnie. The incident that has placed him on death row involved his accidental escape from the home while visiting family were moving furniture. Mr. and Mrs. Van Vleet were sleeping at the time. According to a witness, Clyde chased after a passing bicyclist and may have bitten him after he kicked out at Clyde. The injury noted was minor. The demand Animal Control Director Michael Oswald insists upon is owner surrender and death, an outcome he tries to ensure through threats and unaffordable fines.
On a previous occasion, a woman complained of an alleged bite that did not break the skin. She could not identify which dog had gripped her and so both paid the penalty and were quarantined at MCAS. I asked Mrs. Van Vleet why they didn't appeal. She stated that the agency promised them that they would get their dogs back, therefore there was no need to appeal. But MCAS did not divulge that these indefinite charges that should have been factually challenged would now become permanent records used against the family. That is how one gets a "history" at MCAS that results in death.
Despite the fact that the Van Vleet's neighbors confirm Clyde's docile temperament, Michael Oswald insists on death for this "repeat offender." The fact that nothing about Clyde's behavior presents a public safety hazard, and the Van Vleet family has now secured the front door in a way that he can never get out even if the door is left open means nothing to Michael Oswald. Rules are rules. Despite the fact that humane effective options exist, Oswald fixes upon his "authority" and his wish that Clyde be killed no matter how unnecessary or harmful to the family. To force that outcome Michael Oswald has denied the family knowledge about pro bono legal services and imprisoned their dog for a month after animal control officers called in Portland police as "reinforcements" to intimidate the Van Vleets into submission. This is a common practice, one described by many citizens.
Will this family be harmed if Clyde dies? Immeasurably. There is no reason to kill this old family dog. Please protest these actions to Multnomah County government: Chair Diane Linn, responsible for policy, and Cecilia Johnson, Director of Community Services who is in charge of animal control practices. They are responsible for MCAS' policies and behavior. There is no point in addressing Michael Oswald, Director of MCAS, who has usurped the public's agenda. He has repeatedly demonstrated that he couldn't care less what you think or in fact what his supervisors think. He has openly stated that he brooks no interference from other government agencies. This is about Michael Oswald's insistence on obedience to his authority no matter how arbitrary, unnecessary, or callous the ruling. There is no "win-win" with this agency only his "win" and your loss. That is why his death statistics are so high and his alienation from the community so vast. An earlier statement by a senior staff person sums it up: "We can't kill the owners, so we kill their dogs." In lieu of education, prevention and compassion, Oswald has instituted vengeance, retaliation and cruelty.
Citizens of Multnomah County routinely protest cruelty and harsh authoritarianism abroad but forget that it is alive and well in Mutnomah County. Please insist on a humane resolution for Clyde and his family and demand an outside independent review of the harsh practices and policies at MCAS. Too many citizens are forced to suffer. Too many companion animals pointlessly die.
Gail O'Connell-Babcock, Ph.D.,
Citizens for Humane Animal Legislation/Watchdog
16004 SW Tualatin-Sherwood Road, Box 508
Sherwood, OR 97140
Telephone: (503) 625-4563; Fax: (503) 925-8299
for more information about MCAS policies and practices go to: www.mcasstopthekilling.com
CONTACT INFORMATION
Diane Linn, Chair
Multnomah County Board of Commissioners
501 SE Hawthorne Boulevard, Suite 600
Portland, OR 97214
e-mail: mult.chair@co.multnomah.or.us
Telephone: (503) 988-3308; Fax: (503) 988-3093
Cecilia Johnson, Director
Department of Community Services
1600 SE 190th Ave., Suite 224
Portland, OR 97233
e-mail: cecilia.j.johnson@co.multnomah.or.us
Telephone: (503) 988-5000; Fax: (503) 988-3048
To whom it may concern:
Ms. Van Vleet called back this afternoon stating that you advised her that she had missed the appeal time by one day and therefore you were killing her dog Clyde immediately. She was extraordinarily distraught. She is now calling legal counsel. I suggest you not kill Clyde as you stated to her that you were going to do, pending legal resolution of several concerns.
Ms. Van Vleet now is represented by legal counsel, Robert Babcock. This was confirmed by certified mail. This matter will also be brought up with the Multnomah County Commission on Monday.
The Van Vleets have no money, and were unable to pay the fees you demanded. You made no offer or effort to assist, nor advised the family of free legal counsel, indeed intentionally withheld that information. Forcing surrender by making legal solutions unaffordable is likely unlawful Also MCAS has recently intentionally withheld and delayed the receipt of time sensitive documents that allow us to notify those without means of free legal counsel.
It would be best that you not kill Clyde while these legal matters are pending lest you become inadvertently liable yourselves. Again, these matters including the denial of appeal are under appeal.
Thank you,
Gail O'Connell-Babcock, Ph.D.
on behalf of Attorney Robert Babcock, legal counsel for the plaintiffs: The Van Vleet family
Ms. Morf,
The charges you have repeated as an apparent reason for shutting down the agency's public record kiosk (installed only months ago at substantial expense) are completely meritless. In fact they are transparent falsehoods, clearly offered in retaliation for criticisms of the agency's appalling practices. Isn't it best to first establish their accuracy before shutting off access to public records? That is why retaliation comes instantly to mind as an investigation will prove these false.
Reb will be asking for more detail about these specious charges but, as to the "distribution of materials" charge, I do want to ask if education is considered a subversive activity by Multnomah County? The people to whom I have provided educational materials (including staff and volunteers) have never complained or asked that I stop distribution, something that has continued for many months. Visitors receive these in the mail but when they are already at the agency it proves more convenient to just hand this to them. Some working at the agency have requested this material. Why is it subversive/inappropriate to hand out materials that help citizens keep their dogs from running at large, prevent bites, etc.? That is all included as part of this community's program for MCAS in the 2000 Task Force recommendations. One really must wonder about the motivation of the agency to now voice complaints about which all have remained silent for years. These are not "problems."
What is it that MCAS is trying to cover up? Mismanagement? Alteration/falsification of public records? Distortion of the reality of the increasing killing frequency and declining adoption rates? The secret pit bull extermination program? Did you ever consider attempting to achieve solutions instead of joining with efforts to hide the problems?
Two years ago, MCAS called my records requests a "security problem" and attempted to interfere with access to the public records by dummying up charges they couldn't back up. They wasted public monies finally having to pay your fees and our fees (over $7,000 for ours alone) on baseless charges. This agency is never held accountable by anyone. Staff members at MCAS have a long history of misconduct and cover up. Neither Ms. Johnson nor Ms. Linn have done anything. Fortunately, it now appears that both will be gone in a few months. For documentation of the misconduct -- lying, falsification of records, killing needlessly, unlawful practice of veterinary medicine, etc. -- go to www.mcasstopthekilling.com. You'll find it interesting.
Concerns about this agency's conduct were prompted by comments from a departing animal control officer : " MCAC's unique position within the County government affords its management almost dictatorial power...You should dig deeper into your references to MCAC's little trick of altering facts and statements to suit their needs" (apparently a county wide failing).
I did. He was right. One doesn't end wrongdoing by expelling the reporter, making it easier for it to continue. One simply fixes the problem and part of that is that the investigation comes first, not the punishment (expulsion). But not in the current Multnomah County government because no one is in charge of animal control. There is absolutely no oversight. With no oversight, a few unqualified people have obtained absolute power. We all know what absolute power creates.
I look forward to working with you in the process of obtaining the records needed to continue documentation of agency misconduct. But what happens to all the other citizens promised access through the public kiosk? Isn't it overkill to take it away and take their acees as well?
Thank you,
Sincerely,
Gail O'Connell-Babcock,Ph.D.
Citizens for Humane Animal Legislation/Watchdog
Mr. Oswald:
You must be honest to the public about your death rates and why these are so high. And you are not. It has entirely to do with your mismanagement and your grotesque parody of temperament testing. It has frankly earned you a national reputation you did not want. I have sent your work out nationally for evaluation by experts. You should have ... but why bother when you think of yourself as Napoleon (not the pastry).
Since you have no real grounds to exclude me from the agency, you simply shut down the kiosk, had a tantrum: poor social judgment; failure to anticipate social/politcal consequences.
One of the problems with insularity is that you lose all social judgment. You have. Now I have more time to make the rounds with the press that I really didn't have before. I will use it wisely and well. Have already.
As has been said before, you just have to move with the times and you haven't. Here is your modus operandi: seek power and control by taking away or scaring others. So predictable It just doesn't work with some people. It doesn't work at all with me.
Gail O'Connell-Babcock.
Just one final word of advice: stop hiding behind others skirts like Georgie Porgie. At your age it is unseemly. One of your favorite moves is the firesetter move. Unwilling to openly come out, you use others as devices to do your "work." Then having set the fire you run away and act as if it had nothing whatsoever to do with you. Stop hiding in your office and using others to make your clandestine points. Only those openly copied are in agreement. You have turned your staff into robots. Most used to be thinking people. Not good for them either.Feel free to respond or just go hide. Failed the character test, Tier 4.
No doubt in retaliation for my comment on the "Employees only" on his door, public records have once again been interrupted. MCAS has removed the public records kiosk out of our concerns that records were not being provided timely (now they are not provided at all, that makes sense). The letter from Jenny Morf is a gem. It should be framed. It is so transparently manipulative. They also grumble about my behavior as if this had no bearing on the decision to take away the public kiosk. Since there is no merit to their complaints on a different matter have instead have chosen the clever route of shutting down the kiosk.
These are the events Michael Oswald refers to as "disruptive" meriting expulsion oops I mean shutting down the kiosk. On January 6 a young man brought in a pit bull he had found and the staff immediately began criticizing the dog. He said this is a great dog, fine with other dogs, etc., and the dog as he left literally wrapped his paws around him. I said if you can foster this dog that would be best because over 95% of unredeemed pit bulls are killed here. He tried then to do this but was told no he couldn't because the dog had already been "processed." As they were taking the dog back I leaned into the public breeze way (where like almost every other once public space the public is no longer allowed) and said his best chance of sparing his dog's life now was to say no PTS and call constantly about his welfare. I was then told by agency staff that I had violated the breezeway space but they did uncomfortably admit this dog would be killed. The finder was promised he would be called. No one at the agency did. On Monday, the first time the finder could get through to the agency, he called and was told that his dog was going to be put to death the following morning. He called us frantically, asking for help. Reb helped him from there. The agency called this "disruptive." The dog was released. Jenny More cited this incidence but never investigated it. Nothing was "disrupted" other than their wish to kill this dog when he had a person who wanted him. The "disruption" was permission to exercise legal rights and report the true likely outcome for this dog.
The provision of educational materials to the public as "inappropriate" is nonsensical. Their staff and volunteers have asked for these articles. The final "charge": entering the legal aide officer's office without permission is laughable. I did as I have so often been instructed: if you can't understand something write it out and leave me a message in my office. The door to her very small public cubicle was open. I left a message on her chair and she kindly responded. The charge is entering without permission, which I have been instructed to do over and over again.
What has happened to government in this town?
The good news is that with time freed up I can work more on Wheeler's campaign and send out correspondence not just to 2 years of citizens addresses I have but to five years worth. Call or e-mail, it is critical that he win now.
Gail
To: County Counsel Jenny Morf
cc:
Legal
Aide Officer Michelle Luckey
Office of Multnomah County Attorney
501 S.E. Hawthorne, Suite 500
Portland, OR 97214
FAX: 503. 988.3377
I understand that Michael Oswald has removed the public records kiosk in response to concerns about "timeliness" ( so now they are really late) and considers "disruptive" my distribution of educational materials to persons I mail these to anyway and who always welcome these when provided ( I will be writing all of them about this new development).
I know you too share these concerns about timeliness or you would not have supported removing the public kiosk in response to this . Attached find the routine request for hard copies that has been in place for 10 years. Out of the same concern for timeliness, the need to decipher routine requests and your very busy schedule into which these routine requests must intrude, I am sending a copy of these requests to Legal Aide Officer Michelle Luckey who despite being new on the job has been extremely helpful and professional in organizing these. As you know this extra administrative step delays records receipt on time sensitive records all the more. I know you can't intend this.
With that in mind I can drive out to MCAS to pick these up on Thursday or Friday unless you have taken the extraordinary measure of banishing me from the agency for providing literature (for example on how to prevent dog bites) to other citizens and even staff. In that case I can call the press.
Or you could FAX these to me, an activity forbidden by Michael Oswald, but one he will perhaps reconsider. The rest is a court matter.
Sincerely,
Gail O'Connell-Babcock