Things are erupting in Los Angeles. Regular readers of AC will remember the mess His Honor, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, found himself in after making an injudicious campaign promise to Animal Rights activists that, if elected, he'd fire Animal Services Director Guerdon Stuckey, and then dragging his feet in doing so.
It looked almost as if His Honor wouldn't bow to AR pressure, would renege (appropriately, in my mind) on his campaign promise, and retain Mr. Stuckey. But then, the ADL-LA turned up the heat, using classic tactics of intimidation and terror.
For those of you who don't know who the ADL-LA is, here's what I wrote in a previous post (op cit):
ADL-LA's campaign against the city is being crafted by none other than Pamelyn Ferdin. Ms Ferdin is also the new President of SHAC-USA, having legally assumed that position when Kevin Kjonaas, presently under indictment for breaking anti-terrrorist laws, resigned. (To my way of thinking, ADL-LA is simply "SHAC-Lite".)
Ms Ferdin is also the wife of Jerry Vlasak, MD, who is (or recently was) the director of the ADL-LA, who is presently a self-appointed Press Officer for the ALF (the terrorist Animal Liberation Front) and who in recent creepy testimony before the US Senate reaffirmed his belief that assassinating scientists was a morally-legitimate tactic (Dr. Vlasak had previously openly advocated assassinating scientists during an interview on Australian TV).
Director Dr. Vlasak is a former spokesman for the PCRM (Physicians for Responsible Medicine), a group receiving hefty funding from PeTA, and a group (PCRM) whose president (Neal Barnard) co-signed a letter with the indicted Kevin Kjonaas.
Faced with ADL-LA's onslaught, I had some advice for His Honor, which was not taken:
In my opinion, he should tell them right up front: "The ALF is a terrorist organization, and Dr. Jerry Vlasak is an ALF Press Officer. Dr.Vlasak is an ADL-LA director, and has publicly advocated the assassination of people to fulfill his ideological fantasy of animal liberation. Pamelyn Ferdin is President of SHAC-USA, and all that implies. I refuse to negotiate with terrorist organizations, their representatives or people who advocate murder. Period."
Now, the LA Times reports that His Honor Mayor Villaraigosa has fired Mr. Stuckey, much to the disapproval of many Animal Control people:
After months of pressure from animal rights activists, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa fired the head of Los Angeles' Animal Services Department on Thursday, replacing him with the man who held the corresponding job in New York City.
The move was praised by some members of Los Angeles' animal welfare community, who said they hoped that the incoming interim general manager, Ed Boks, would bring serious change to a department that kills tens of thousands of stray dogs a year.
". . . praised by some members of Los Angeles' animal welfare community . . ."
Perhaps, but don't you get the idea that the reporter doesn't understand the difference between "Animal Welfare" and "Animal Rights?" In brief, Animal Rights people believe that the life of an animal and that of a human are of equal value, and that if it's immoral to do something to a human, it is no less so to do it to an animal. (For a fuller discussion of the differences between AR and AW, read this. If you understand that, you'll understand this.)
But 149 department employees protested the move in a letter that accused Villaraigosa of caving in to a radical fringe of animal activists who have used vandalism and threats to try to drive away the outgoing general manager, Guerdon H. Stuckey.
"To concede to the terrorists for the ousting of our general manager … has placed a pall over the department and the city," the letter says. "Continued empowerment of these terrorists will only serve for them to step up their terrorist activities against department employees."
Exactly so. As I mentioned before — His Honor should simply have said: "I don't negotiate with terrorists."
The reactions suggest that Villaraigosa, who has moved deftly through other contentious issues, has yet to master the bizarre political predicament that has grown up around Los Angeles' animal shelters in recent years.
L.A.'s mainstream animal welfare activists have never lacked for passion, but they have organized into an especially potent force of late. In January, they held a voters forum during the mayoral race that a number of leading candidates, including Villaraigosa, attended.
At the same time, extremist groups like the Animal Liberation Front have been suspected by law enforcement of staging numerous acts of vandalism and harassment in Southern California. In September, the front took responsibility for detonating smoke grenades in Stuckey's apartment building on Bunker Hill.
Villaraigosa, who has met with animal rights activists in the past, said he did not cave in to pressure from extremists.
"That's not what we did," he said. "I told them that as long as they continued to engage in that kind of activity I would never bend to that kind of pressure. So they stopped a long time ago."
But Julie Butcher, head of the union that represents most rank-and-file Animal Services workers, said her members have good reason to be upset.
"They are angry that the city would somehow bargain with terrorists," Butcher said. "It looks like the city is totally giving in."
Ms Butcher is spot on. The fact that he negotiated with these people at all taints his decision to fire Mr. Stuckey, compromises His Honor's integrity: the fact that he told them that as long as they engaged in the pressure tactics he'd not bend means absolutely nothing. He could easily have negotiated a deal in which if they stopped the pressure, he'd fire Stuckey . . . the pressure stoppage being required for plausible deniability. ("Look, I can't fire Mr. Stuckey as long as your crew is trying to intimidate people, because it'll look like I'm caving. Tell 'em to knock it off, so I can fire him and plausibly deny that I was pressured into it.")
The broader controversy turns on the deaths of the animals in Los Angeles' six city shelters. L.A. euthanized more than 39,000 dogs in the 2001-02 fiscal year, and reduced the number to about 25,000 in the 2004-05 year, according to the department.
Although some officials say those numbers show progress, activists contend that the numbers are actually much higher. They also argue that Los Angeles has lagged behind big cities that have adopted "low kill, no kill" strategies.
Many animal rights activists had opposed Stuckey's appointment since former Mayor James K. Hahn named him to the position in November 2004.
Stuckey had a management background but little experience with animals, and they were worried that he would be unable to bring the kill rate down.
Then-City Councilman Villaraigosa voted to approve the appointment. But at the voters forum in January, he told activists he would fire Stuckey. More recently he appeared to waver, saying the Animal Services chief deserved a chance.
As indeed he did. But Mr. Stuckey got trapped within a web woven in part by a naive candidate Villaraigosa, who wanted Animal Rights support for his election campaign and in part by the extremist ADL-LA which had trapped Villaraigosa and then played him like a fish, holding him to his campaign promise on the one hand, and intimidating him and other city officials and employees on the other.
In a terse letter to Stuckey on Thursday, Villaraigosa announced his removal and thanked him for his service.
Stuckey could not be reached for comment. But Tuesday he called a meeting of his staff to let them know he was being pressured to step down, according to two city officials familiar with the session.
"He told the staff the mayor's office has requested his resignation, and he said he has declined," one high-level city official said.
Other City Hall officials said Stuckey has retained legal counsel, ostensibly to fight his dismissal.
Meanwhile, Villaraigosa's office praised Boks' 22-year record in dealing with animals. According to a news release, Boks was director of New York City Animal Care and Control for two years.
He recently resigned, the release states, "after setting in motion a turnaround effort to upgrade animal shelters, substantially increase pet adoptions and spay/neuter. During his tenure, New York City reduced euthanasia by approximately 20% and increased pet adoptions by 30%."
Well, let's see: from 2001-2002 through 2004-2005, the LA Animal Services people had reduced from 39,000 to 25,000. So a reduction of 14,000 would amount to . . . what . . . about a 35% reduction in the number of animals euthanized. And Mr. Stuckey is credited with reducing euthanasiz 16% in the tumultuous year he served (below).
It sounds like the department was moving in the right direction, doesn't it?
Before that, Boks was head of Maricopa County Animal Care and Control in Phoenix, where he implemented a similar turnaround, the release states.
Boks, who starts his job Jan. 3, could not be reached for comment Thursday.
Scott Sorrentino, president of the Rescue and Humane Alliance-Los Angeles, said the hire was a victory for animal rights activists.
"We're cautiously optimistic that this is an improvement over what we've seen in the past," Sorrentino said. "Mr. Boks has definitely associated himself with 'no kill.' He comes in with experience that others in the past have not had."
But Sorrentino noted that the praise for Boks is not unanimous. Indeed, in recent weeks activist Daniel Guss, head of the animal rescue group Stand Foundation, has argued that Boks lacks law and labor experience. Guss also suggested that Boks' success in New York may have been exaggerated.
However, Guss said Thursday that he was cautiously optimistic that Boks would do a good job because of his extensive shelter experience.
In their letter to Villaraigosa, the 149 Animal Services employees — more than half the department total — said Stuckey's contributions were being overlooked.
They noted increased adoptions and spay and neuter programs, saying they resulted in a 16% decrease in euthanasia in one year.
Employees also lamented years of pandemonium that have taken a toll on their morale. Boks will be the department's fourth general manager in four years.
When Stuckey took the job last fall, he was filling a vacancy created the previous spring by the retirement of Jerry Greenwalt.
Greenwalt left after animal rights groups picketed his home and painted the word "murderer" on his car.
He had taken over the agency in 2001 after Hahn fired General Manager Dan Knapp. At the time he was removed, Knapp had been hospitalized for months with what he said were stress-related seizures brought on in part by activists' criticism of his leadership.
Tariq Khero, vice president of the civilian board that oversees the Animal Services Department, said he hoped Boks would bring a stronger spay and neuter program to Los Angeles to help prevent the glut of stray animals on the street.
But when asked if Boks would put an end to the clashes and feuds that have roiled the department, he replied, "Absolutely not."
"Absolutely not" indeed. His Honor the Mayor has handed the ADL-LA a victory, one that will encourage them and others like them to renew their crusade at the earliest opportunity. You can see them preparing the way already, with their comments that they are "cautiously optimistic" and in Mr. Guss's observation that Mr. Boks' record in New York may have been exaggerated.
A foundation for further trouble is already being laid.
My advice to His Honor remains the same: "I don't negotiate with terrorists. Period." And if the ADL-LA wishes to press the point, His Honor should expose them and their people's history for what it is — loudly, clearly and often.