MCAS New Director Announcements:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1GvhwbYxh5TzzHPjKkmYDNv9IsMspQJBW
The announcement of Wade Sadler’s selection as the new MCAS Director came as a surprise to county citizens who believed genuine qualifications for a new public shelter director were important after 3 years of rough going with former director Jackie Rose. But there was one catch: Citizens were following down one path, democratic process, while Multnomah County’s government was following another, engineered outcomes. Multnomah County’s expertise is the appearance of caring about inclusive democracy when none is intended. Collegial loyalty is the most valued quality; neither merit nor citizen involvement is critical. They can be easily faked while jobs are awarded as political favors with qualifications glossed over.
It should have come as no surprise that after 9 months, the length of a full-term pregnancy, the selection was announced just before Valentine’s Day, a good time for broken hearts and broken promises. Mr. Sadler was favored by Kim Peoples and Jackie Rose at the outset. It was their joint decision to install Wade Sadler as director from the very beginning of the “search,” a decision guaranteeing the continuity of mediocrity at best. Jamie Waltz, Interim Director of Community Services, gave the “Director’s choice Rose” to Wade Sadler, Interim Director of MCAS, following what was described as an earnest “detailed and painstaking process,” from which all details are missing.
The making of the Director involved creating a myth to fill the void marked by a lack of accomplishment. Three narratives are available now, each a more polished version of the previous one. They highlight insignificance and describe the ordinary as miraculous. Two were composed on February 12, 2020 by Ms. Waltz and the last is an interview on February 21 with Mr. Sadler by Jay Levitre, MCAS’s development and communications coordinator, entitled “Moving forward…” That’s the only possible title because if Mr. Sadler and his superiors looked back, they would turn into pillars of salt, mired in misleading or disingenuous comments with failure chasing close behind.
From narrative one we learn that the selection process began by asking MCAS staff and the members of the MCAS “Community Advisory Committee,” a group selected by the director from volunteers, not appointed community stakeholders, to identify the desired “qualities, skills and key characteristics” of the future Multnomah County Animal Services Director. The qualities hoped for in a leader were the obvious: “Good Communicator, Honest, Trusting, Shelter Experience.” After that initial inquiry the MCAS staff was never asked for its thoughts again and invited only to “meet” the finalist. Jamie Waltz, the Interim Director of Community Services, reported that the county also sought input from local animal welfare organizations but mentioned only the Oregon Humane Society, omitting other organizations with truly relevant experience such as other public shelters and non-profit rescues that routinely take in shelter animals.
The Oregon Humane Society is not a good model. It pre-selects its animal clients and has no direct public shelter experience or knowledge about succeeding in an open-admissions public shelter with a demographic of significantly low income and vulnerable populations, at times in crisis and requiring social services. MCAS is where the local humane society sends rejected animals. Highlighting the Oregon Humane Society was intended to inspire confidence that all was well. Branding and name recognition were used to obtain a “free pass” around the facts and a suspect process.
Although the selection process was described as lasting 9 months, starting in May 2019, after Jackie Rose’s departure, it did not truly begin until posted on August 23, 2019 and ended only 6 weeks later on October 15, 2019. The “search” seemed limited by time constraints to a very few candidates. A preferred candidate can rise to the top easily in a shallow pond. The deceptive appearance of a search was all that was intended. The fact is that there was a 6 week, quickly closed, recruitment period, not a 9 month “hand wringing one” during which Jamie Waltz agonized. Throw a herring into the pond, include no competition, declare a winner. From the White House to Animal House that is governance by “Impression Politics.” What the County described as a “decision of this magnitude” was in fact taken lightly and, in Mr. Sadler’s case, was based upon an unremarkable work history including 5 years at MCAS in Client Services (collections), a short military history, and management of a vintage retail clothing store. It took 9 months of pretense, a painful process, to attempt to convince the public that Wade Sadler was the best choice from an undisclosed list of other candidates.
The third narrative about the selection process reads like an uplifting sermon on a Sunday morning. It begins with Mr. Sadler’s claim that
- “Yes, I care a lot about animals, but I also want to be able to help the people attached to those animals. We are considering the social justice perspective relating to diversity, equity and inclusion, and what it means to the services we offer. How do we help the people who are struggling, who need the most support, or who aren’t accessing our services?“
This statement contains the County’s essential buzz words, “diversity, equity, and inclusion” and would merit some applause if based upon facts.
Unfortunately, the facts point in the opposite direction. The very few programs in place are not unique, noteworthy or innovative: expanding low cost veterinary services, already in place on Saturdays, championing the “Shelter, Protect, Reunite” program already put in place by his predecessor, and a complicated 6 month payment plan with a 10% down payment described as “affordable options for low income customers,” that upon review is unaffordable to most. Redemption fees are extraordinarily high compared to adoptions: impound fees double with each impoundment starting at $50 to $100 to $200 on a third impound accompanied by daily board fees of $25 raised by $10 from $15 in July 2019. Adoption is cheap compared to redemption, the agency’s primary mission. The “Shelter Protect Reunite Program,” a grant from which MCAS reimburses itself in order to pay for redemption fees and a license on a one-time basis to some homeless persons whose companion animals become impounded has a limited effect. The vulnerable are given short shrift.
The following two examples make short work of this claim and illustrate how little the County and Mr. Sadler have done to help vulnerable populations.
- (a) On May 08, 2018, Mr. Sadler refused to reconsider a $1595.00 redemption fee charged to a retired homeless veteran for his dog, Lucky. That exorbitant charge included all accrued boarding charges from January 25, 2018 when Lucky was impounded and included daily board from February 02, 2018 onward after his jailed owner was unable to find anyone who could redeem and keep Lucky during his imprisonment.
Lucky became MCAS property at their disposal beginning February 02, 2018. After MCAS claimed Lucky to be “MCAS property,” Mr. Sadler insisted that the homeless veteran pay the 103 days of board ”owed” as ransom despite the fact that Lucky had been their dog and their responsibility from February 02 onward and the fact that during that time they had failed to find rescue options for him. He was not made available for adoption. In response to concerns, MCAS ultimately reduced the demand to 50% of the total alleged due and Lucky’s owner was required to pay a total of $797.50 on a schedule of $120 monthly over 6 months. It was extortion divided into time payments for the poor.
The payment plan MCAS advertises as assisting homeless and vulnerable populations also discourages good Samaritans from stepping in to redeem someone’s dog when the owner is unable, due to life circumstances, to do so him or herself. It does not apply to 3rd parties. It punishes Good Samaritans if they step in. Full fees must be paid. Often, they cannot afford to pay, often they have the same hardship constraints. These rules and constraints continue today to the present. The payment plan does not now nor has it ever applied to 3rd parties picking up companion animals for jailed or hospitalized friends. Often, they cannot afford to pay and the person loses his companion. Two years later, after Wade Sadler has been named MCAS Director, we see the same usurious behavior continue. The war on poverty has become a war on the poor.
- (b) On February 20, 2020, one day before the “Looking forward” narrative was published, a homeless couple was a defendant at an agency hearing. Traveler, a service dog for one of the parties, had been impounded on November 16 for having become “stray” four times in 22 months. This was the animal control officer’s statement: “Regardless of the lack NOIS issued, I am still suspending ownership of “Traveler” for being a chronic loose nuisance.” The county also demanded $2500 in board fees during the time Traveler had been involuntarily impounded. A Good Samaritan paid the initial required appeal fee, $125, as MCAS does not permit reduced or partial payment plans secondary to poverty related lack of means. MCAS would not bend and continued to condition release of Traveler upon payment of the completely unaffordable amount.
Newly minted Director Wade Sadler states the best way to” better serve community members experiencing homelessness, living with mental health concerns, and other vulnerable underserved populations is to begin discussions and collaborate with other agencies such as the Joint Office of Homeless Services (JOHS), and the Department of County Human Services. He does not outline what he is seeking. Here is how you really start. Ask every vulnerable person who comes to MCAS what they need and what resources they might need to take care of their companion animals and comply with county ordinances. Then provide the help. It is not complicated.
There are incalculable ways and areas in which Mr. Sadler’s words do not and have not matched his conduct. It is true, as Mr. Sadler stated, that MCAS is not “Your Grandfather’s Pound.” It is not. It is former director Jackie Rose’s pound. Wade Sadler is her faithful steward. The role of a new director should be to critically review past policies and practices, not inherit and repeat its failures. Mr. Sadler has and will continue to uncritically carry forward all of former Director Jackie Rose’s policies and practices, hostile to pet retention even as he whistles a new redemption tune. It is all he knows. Ms. Rose continues to mentor him.
Wade Sadler’s employment background does not conform with the background expected of a public shelter director. It is retail sales management for 12 years beginning 2003 until 2015 at Buffalo Exchange, a local clothing shop, not an animal Sanctuary. He joined MCAS as the MCAS Client Services manager in 2015; in October 2017 he also assumed the role of Business Operations Manager after the previous Business manager, Chief Enforcement Field Supervisor Randall Brown, was dismissed for theft of county funds.
His training and focus have always been adoptions as sales, moving the homeless animal inventory rapidly through the system, and disclaiming responsibility for returns stating categorically on June 17, 2019 despite evidence to the contrary that “ MCAS does not believe that returns, under any circumstances are a result of failed adoption policies.”
Wholesale and easy adoptions accompanied by low adoption standards come at a price paid by homeless animals, often with their lives. Bidding for the directorship after outperforming the previous director’s annual end of year holiday special sales where animals are given away free or nearly free for fees as low as one-dollar upped Mr. Sadler’s numbers. Anyone can “market” an animal for free. It takes a humane sheltering background and experience to make sure whatever the strategy, animals benefit too. Wade Sadler’s approach is sales and numbers, not animal welfare. Redemption and pet retention are an afterthought that lose out to adoptions and sales every time.
Despite all the factual evidence to the contrary, Wade Sadler continues to falsely claim that “Our first priority is to reunite stray pets with their people,” and then reports a low overall 30 % reclaim rate from November 2018 to November 2019. No, redemption is not a priority. And it is his policies that are responsible for dismal redemption figures: policies that dictate high impound fees, daily board fees increased from $15 to $25 in July 2019, unaffordable to most in its demographic, and a dysfunctional poorly performing Shelter Buddy “Lost and Found” system among many causes.
Redemption and animal care have lost out to adoption fever in the drive for quick high numbers. The focus is: “What will sell quickly and what will not?” “Damaged” animals, those in need of care, training or rehabilitation are discarded, often not permitted rescue options even when these have been offered and are instead killed. There are examples every week. “Unhealthy and untreatable” is the new disposable convenience label replacing “killed for space.” It is a system focused on discarding unwanted animals and falsely labeling them when MCAS just does not want to make any effort and does not care, quick adoption sales and killing are more efficient. There is no transparency and no opportunity to review the management’s decisions, a reality that blocks those with qualifications and credentials from review. These are decisions that involve the destruction of life. There are more safeguards for the protection of inanimate property.
It is quite clear that animals are being mislabeled and killed as a matter of convenience, that something is amiss when in the 2018 Asilomar Report 27 dogs entered MCAS labeled “unhealthy/untreatable” and in the final count 101 were destroyed as “unhealthy untreatable,” a nearly fourfold increase. The fact that the overwhelming majority became “unhealthy/untreatable” during their stay at MCAS, indicates a problem with the system not the animals. The absence of transparency in disposition diagnoses/prognoses means they cannot be reviewed.
Evident in records and citizens’ reports is the fact that the county’s humane values are violated every day at MCAS. That is the new direction.
Gail O’Connell-Babcock
---
MCAS Director Recruitment:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ewR_63oQa7Gh8tWNb9COpJbfYGsvVaIu
MCAS Records of Lucky and Homeless Veteran:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1iij7EKjlspbjckwpj9j-cBbAU_B4zvx8
Traveler’s Owners’ MCAS Records:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1eQoHYOrHHpIu15X11mkib_6sjluvQzbq
MCAS Low Income Payment Plan:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Rc1BvJdkuQAcgCcJcxMTWqIuJrPsbR0X
MCAS Programs for Extreme Financial Hardship:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1mO-KdHBQBbMwhGs-g53UyaQlGmwRqooT