Today, we sent this email to Mayor Mahan, City Manager Maguire, and the San Jose City Council. Our pleas for justice for animals at San Jose Animal Care & Services have gone unanswered. When will they listen? How many dogs must die? Please continue to share the petition. Make our voices heard!

To: Mayor Matt Mahan and Jennifer Maguire
Cc: San Jose City Council  

Dear Mayor Mahan,

I am writing to express deep concern regarding the current operations and alarming euthanasia trends at the San Jose Animal Care Center (SJACC). Since June 20, 2025, 24 dogs have been placed on "Final Status" for euthanasia. This situation cannot continue.

While some of these dogs have been rescued or adopted, many others remain at risk of euthanasia, with deadlines approaching quickly. Volunteers are scrambling to create videos, write bios and network at risk dogs to find fosters and rescue. Although I am grateful for the tireless effort by dedicated volunteers, the shelter's failure to network final dogs, not only lacks public transparency but shifts responsibility solely on volunteers to get these dogs out of the shelter alive. How come the sudden surge in Final Dogs? 

Numerous dogs are being unfairly considered for euthanasia based on their presence in the kennel alone. A dog should never be judged solely by their appearance in the kennel. Kennel stress results from outdated shelter designs, inadequate infrastructure, and a failure to meet modern shelter standards . Has the shelter updated the architectural design in any way over the last two decades? “Poor  housing  is  one  of   the  greatest shortcomings observed in shelters and has a substantially  negative  impact  on  both  health  and  well-being.” - Section 4 Facilities ASV Guidelines

I understand that humane euthanasia is sometimes necessary, particularly in cases involving untreatable medical conditions or genuine public safety concerns. However, what is occurring at SJACC exceeds ethical boundaries. Dogs are being euthanized for behavioral issues stemming from the shelter environment itself—an environment that fails to meet basic welfare standards and actively contributes to behavioral decline. What qualifies a staff member to assess behavior in dogs deemable for euthanasia. Section 9.5 Behavior Assessments states, “Current recommendations for behavior assessment are to combine objective information collected via behavioral history with objective behavior observations noted during a variety of  interactions.”Many staff have expressed that they receive minimal training, which often results in the use of aversive handling techniques with dogs. Insufficient training also creates stress and uncertainty for newer staff members. One staff member was observed utilizing a broom stick to push a dog in the kennel. This is unacceptable, and shelter leadership must take responsibility for ensuring staff-dog interactions are handled in a positive and safe manner.

The shelter, built in 2004, now represents a structural and operational failure. Its open-sided design promotes reactivity and psychological distress in animals. The lack of visual barriers leads to constant exposure to external stimuli, causing stress and anxiety. This design also contributes to undersocialization, as dogs have limited opportunities for positive, structured interaction with other dogs. Currently, the primary avenues for socialization come from dedicated volunteers and the nonprofit organization Partners in Animal Care & Compassion (PACC), which runs playgroups (9.5.3. Playgroup, ASV Guidelines). The shelter's design should facilitate common, monitored areas where dogs can safely socialize, build confidence, and improve their adoptability; unfortunately, it does not.

The Association of Shelter Veterinarians (ASV) Guidelines for Standards of Care clearly state that:  
- "Animals must be housed in a manner that allows them to retreat from view and avoid contact with other animals when desired." (Section 9.1)  
- "Enclosures should be designed to minimize stress and overexposure to auditory and visual stimulation." (Section 9.2)  
- "Animals should have daily opportunities for enrichment and physical activity, ideally with access to outdoor space." (Section 9.4)  
- "Opportunities for appropriate social contact with conspecifics should be provided whenever possible." (Section 9.5)  

Currently, none of these standards are met at the San Jose facility. Dogs are confined in loud, overstimulating environments without visual barriers or options for retreat. Instead of addressing fundamental issues such as shelter redesign, enrichment programs, offering low-cost spay and neuter services to the public, and enforcing illegal breeding laws, the city continues to resort to symptom management by euthanizing dogs that deteriorate under these stressful conditions. For example, records show for July 2025 105 puppies entered the shelter system. Three of these puppies entered the shelter a second time within the same time period, accounting for a total of 108 encounters for dogs aged 11 months or younger. Of the 105 puppies - 89 of them were 6 months or younger at the time of entrance into the shelter system. 

This pattern aligns with Albert Bandura’s theory of moral disengagement, where harmful practices are justified as necessary or inevitable, allowing individuals and institutions to distance themselves from moral responsibility. By framing kennel-stress-related euthanasia as unavoidable, city leadership risks normalizing preventable harm instead of investing in sustainable solutions. We must recognize that this harm is not inevitable but rather a result of our failure to act.

This is not an isolated request. Dog advocates across our community have made dozens of outreach efforts, many of which have gone unanswered for weeks or ignored entirely. How can we expect shelter leadership to meet higher standards when city officials are not leading by example in communication, transparency, or responsiveness? Leadership starts at the top, and the silence speaks volumes right now.

San Jose is at the heart of Silicon Valley, operating on a $17 million animal services budget; yet, the shelter remains trapped in outdated, reactive policies. We are long overdue for meaningful investment in infrastructure that provides humane housing, reduces stress-related behavioral decline, and increases adoptability. Improving the lives of our animals will not only help them but also reduce the financial burden on the city, as fewer animals will need to be housed and cared for in the long term.

As a taxpayer, a native San Jose resident, and a San Jose State University graduate, I am profoundly disappointed by the lack of urgency from current city leadership in addressing this crisis. The system is failing our community's most vulnerable animals, and it is disheartening to witness this lack of action.

I urge you to:
1. Align SJACC with ASV shelter care standards.  
2. Expand accessible spay/neuter programs and launch a community education campaign to promote responsible pet ownership.  
3. Enforce existing illegal breeding ordinances to reduce intake at its source.  
4. Invest in rebuilding or redesigning the facility to meet modern humane housing expectations.  
5. Train shelter staff, hire a certified behaviorist 

Our community is not only in crisis; it operates in violation of ethical and evidence-based standards. The solution requires more than crisis management; it demands addressing root causes and demonstrating moral leadership for transformation.