(Continued from previous page)
than 483,000 voters,” Gimenez wrote in his original budget message July 9, 2013.
Two days later, he changed his mind.
Yes, there’s an oversight board on their plan. One appointed by the mayor and commissioners, comprised of veteran animal activists and professionals, to recommend spending priorities and clinic locations, etc., that would ultimately have to be approved by the commission. This was agreed upon by Munoz when he worked for five months with Michael Rosenberg and Rita Schwartz and others to create the Pets’ Trust plan, which is meant to be a national model.
“I spent 2 1/2 years believing Gimenez when he told me that all these people wanted to do is have a board and a budget and jobs,” Suarez said. “I feel that I’ve been misled. I was told these people wanted jobs, that they wanted an agency.”
Suarez put them through a little test when he met with them recently. “They didn’t even bring up an advisory board,” he said.
“It’s the furthest thing from our mind,” Pet’s Trust President and founder Rosenberg told me. “Naturally, we think it’s important to have an oversight board, to make sure that the money is spent where it is supposed to go.
“The extra $4 million was not spent where it needed to be spent. We were there when Gimenez told Alex that he wanted $3 million out of $4 million to go to spay and neutering. That just didn’t happen,” said Rosenberg, who has emailed his large group of supporters to show up at the meeting at 2 p.m. at County Hall.
Munoz had apparently told the mayor that he could accomplish the plan with $4 million more. But that hasn’t happened either.
Nearly three years later, we are not spaying and neutering at the numbers we should be, we are turning people away with a sign at the door for no more intake, we are fudging the numbers, we are telling callers that we don’t pick up strays if they are not dangerous dogs, we have changed the way we count the euthanized dogs, not including sick and elderly dogs surrendered by their owners, and we are sending dogs and cats to other states through some kind of sick underground railroad.
But we are spending more money each year.
“How much have we done? Not much,” Suarez said. “The Pet’s Trust people are right and the mayor is essentially wrong.”
In fact, it’s worse, said Schwartz, the other founding member of the Pets’ Trust. “People think that we are a no kill shelter already so there are more people dropping animals off,” she said.
Read related story: Commissioner Jose “Pepe” Diaz draws unknown opponent
The ordinance is likely to pass the committee tomorrow, with only Commissioners Jose “Pepe” Diaz — who has a feud with the Pet’s Trust, who put a candidate against him last year — and Juan Zapata, who is still stuck on that control thing.
“I don’t feel comfortable handing over $20 million to one group of people to spend however they want,” Zapata said, still convinced that there is a money grab at stake here.
“When I met with them at La Carreta, and I met with them for two hours, they said there had to be an independent trust,” Zapata said.
But in all of my conversations with Rosenberg and Schwartz, the trust or advisory board is not a deal breaker. They just want fewer animals to be killed.
So today’s meeting presents the county electeds with an opportunity to forge something new from the Pet’s Trust plan, if not through a tax and not with an independent trust.
And this is a good thing for two reasons.
Because Suarez is not just speaking up for animals today. He’s speaking up for democracy.
Pages: 1 2
Miami-Dade Pets’ Trust back at county with a new chance added by Ladra on
View all posts by Ladra →
