Why Does Portland Oregon Intimidate Homeless?

To; Michael Oswald

      Officer Charles Poetz

      Kim Peoples, Director  Community Services

To: Marissa Madrigal, Multnomah County Chair

      Multnomah County Commission

 

Policies and practices toward the public and in particular the homeless and their animals that must be immediately addressed/stopped.

 

I left a voice mail message for Officer Poetz last night about this matter. This is the reason.

 

MCAS enforcement abuse of power

 

Winning animal surrender by any means isn't winning; it is exploitation of poverty and limited circumstances; an abuse of power and authority against the public you are charged with serving.

 

This is one more example. I did seek out Charlie's owner because when a friend of his owner, ( one owner is listed as Daniel Thompson) called MCAS on his behalf within days of impoundment, he believed Charlie had been killed. MCAS refused to confirm or disconfirm. That was a power play and wrong. Why not tell him Charlie was alive and could be redeemed instead of intentionally allowing a misunderstanding?

 

I know Mr. Thompson has called the pound. And I know that you plan to issue him a ticket along with an unachievable condition but don't plan to tell him we are a resource for and can provide free legal help.  Please tell him where to contact us for pro bono help.or that is another power play.After all, you tell those in need of other resources where to find them. "Winning" against a homeless person without resources isn't winning at all. It is wrong. Most citizens need pro bono legal help because  the hearings process is deliberately stacked against them,

 

Finally, the release condition for Charlie is impossible to meet and that is another government power play: i.e.that Mr. Thompson must have a secure enclosure. Do you mean a Vari Kennel as a modification requirement  or a stand up concrete kennel, your usual requirement?  When you insist that homeless persons build a kennel on property they don't have ( by definition they have no home, and no fixed address) you are deliberately exploiting their homelessness and imposing a condition that can't be met to "win" surrender.

 

I have brought this to your attention over and over again and as usual " You can't hear me".

MCAS enforcement is entirely based upon a failed system of severe punishments, escalting fines, then a demand for owner surrender. Instead of prevention/education owner education diversion programs successful elsewhere and/or addressing the particular problems the homeless have on the streets "Street smarts for the street dog" you manipulate your preferred outcome. It is easy to plan constructive safety programs, but hard for the entitled and unmotivated. Fines teach absolutely nothing. Half the time you are charging them against citizens who have no money and  they go permanently to collections where they are never collected. Most citizens need help not the back of you hand. Help goes a long way.

 

I am asking for a response both about Charlie and the repeated listed concerns, not silence.

 

Thank you

 

Gail O'Connell-Babcock

Citizens for Humane Animal Legislation/Watchdog

telephone: 503.625.4563