Portland Oregon Homeless Continue To Be Bullied & Dogs Seized

To: Michael Oswald

      Kim Peoples
      Multnomah County Chair Marisa Madrigal  
CC: Legal Aide Officer Michelle Luckey
CC:Marc Jolin, JOIN
CC: Robert Babcock
CC: Others in the community
 
The question is : What is wrong with the current picture? 
 
 First, although I was the author of this letter of concern ( below), I was excluded as a recipient from Michelle Luckey's response. That illustrates a common dysfunctional leveraging agency practice: eliminating others views or opportunity to respond by deliberately shoving them out of the way when their point of view might differ. Permitting dialog. that might change minds and lead to change is stifled. Only one point of view is permitted: the status quo..

That must change.

 Two, the litany of David Jacobs minor infractions intended to label him as a scofflaw is part of a familiar pattern of focusing upon an individual until a dosier of complaints is built up then saying" That's it: I got you." and bringing the hammer down.

 Nowhere as incidents occur, (and owning dogs on the streets is indeed challenging), does MCAS engage anyone  they have cited in constructive interventions most likely to lead to change.. At most  homeless citizens are told to muzzle their dogs constantly except when eating or drinking or exercising or in cases of extreme heat, open to a range of subjective judgement. 

These recommendations are virtually impossible to follow and a restriction of constant muzzling is inhumane.Instead  more tickets are followed by unaffordable escalating fines followed by seizing the dogs of the homeless and the most frequent outcome, almost always, is killing their companion animals. I can provide those records. 

 Citizens, particularly the homeless, and often minorities, are targeted and it seems to become a mission "to get them".

 It took weeks and persistence to locate David Jacobs when all MCAS had to do was notify him ( and others in similar predicaments) that pro bono legal and training help are available. MCAS has persistently refused. to do so or cooperate  in any way despite our frequent requests. Instead they,offer as a false justification that then they would have to notify the homeless of all the attorneys and trainers in the county. 

That statement  is hugely misleading and patently false. The intransigent position of refusing notification  means homeless parties are denied help in an administrative hearing stacked against them. The motive to deprive them of fair play and justice is clear , MCAS has also consistently refused to accommodate the financial constraints of homelessness by lowering appeal fees ( $25 plus $100 impound fee).

 It is clear from the combination of those two practices that the county intends to deprive its poorest, most vulnerable, and least powerful citizens of due process rights because  they have no financial means.

 This is about unilateral power and the abuses of this power, beginning with not permitting a response.

The status quo: Citizens are targeted with escalating fines and punishments but punishment teaches nothing especially to those who are homeless. Other communities utilize mediation, owner education diversion programs, and seek solutions founded upon prevention and education. MCAS is modeled on escalating fines, punishment  and threats and unilateral control, an ineffective model leading to repeat offenses because nothing gets solved, meaning the model fails, and fails citizens because that is the only tool MCAS utilizes.

 Silencing constructive criticism and debate is just another form of bullying. For the sake of this community and its citizens, among them the most vulnerable, can we not have a constructive debate that goes beyond push back and silencing, from the status quo? That is how beneficial change happens.This community deserves that.
Sincerely,

Gail O'Connell- Babcock
503.625.4563

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

Why Does Portland Oregon Allow Animal Control To Jackboot Homeless & Their Animals?

To: The Multnomah County County Aniaml Services

CC: Multnomah County Commission

 

I understand that all that prevents the writ of review for Ozzie, going forward is Michael Holter and his mother's poverty. Michael Holter is homeless and suffers form depression. Neither he nor his mother have $500 for the writ of review to now move forward/proceed..

 

I will raise that money. I will also point out MCAS s rigid intransigence and prejudice towards the poor and homeless once again. Ozzie is a Level 2, a repeat offense in going after a small dog as he was exiting the vehicle. His mother asked the neighbor to hold onto his dog while she exited and he did not 

 

Why do you think killing for this offense, ( if  there was any injury to the other dog  at all, it was negligible ) is the only solution? That seems extraordinarily vindictive. Ironically MCAS strikes deals with dogs sponsored by organizations over far more serious greater offenses. I can illustrate that very recently. Furthermore MCAS made visiting Ozzie virtually impossible for his owners. The restrictions were a total of 15 minutes, divided into 5 minute segments, 5 minutes each since there were three persons: Michael, his sister, and mother, no treats, not allowed to get out and exercise. The restrictions border on sadism. There is no public safety reason for them at all, just cruelty. And they are commonplace at this agency. .

 

I wil raise the $500. And I am asking for an outside professional expert review of MCAS enforcement. This cannot continue.  The records for Ozzie are among those attached. 

 

Gail O'Connell-Babcock

503.625.4563