Hello from Pima County, AZ referenced in article. Can someone with direct access to petitioners provide this evidence, perhaps helpful, to amend wasteful spending petition.
There is a fairly recent video (I'd have to dig to find it but it's out there perhaps on FB 'Fix our Shelters" or "Cal Animals Exposed"), where Hassen is defending her contract to RIVCO supervisors. She has Monica Dangler beside her (looking uncomfortable at misrepresentations for RIVCO) boasting about how Dangler ran the "largest foster program in US" representing that a substantial foster program could help solve RIVCO's shelter disaster.
She is referring to Pima Animal Care Center (PACC) where Dangler was director until she resigned to join Kristen Hassen at Outcomes Consulting for this contract and presumably others.
The presentation is entirely dishonest. What Hassen doesn't say is such a foster program requires 2-3 foster coordinator positions and A MEDICAL CLINIC TO SUPPORT THE FOSTERS which RIVCO couldn't fund since they haven't funded the basics.
Dogs available for fostering are the big (over 40 lb), elderly, with medical issues, deteriorating from shelter stress. The puppies and super adoptable dogs are not available for foster. The fosters are responsible for all supplies except medical which almost no one would foster a dog needing medical treatment not provided by shelter at today's private clinic prices.
The only reason PACC is a modernized shelter with support programs and a CLINIC is because Tucson community generously passed a 22 million dollar bond issue in 2014 to expand the shelter, previously a 1960's dungeon with around 30% live outcome and no medical care (except vax) not even simple antibiotics. Shelter dogs can now be treated for a range of conditions.
Kristen Hassen was PACC director prior to Dangler (resigned to join Outcomes Consulting). As Director, Dangler ordered several UNNECCESSARY consulting reports for PACC by Outcomes Consulting paid for by Friends of PACC--- the auxiliary funding support. The extent of these wasteful contracts is being investigated. Obviously dirty.
Hassen and Dangler have built this fraudulent resume on the accomplishments of others, the Tucson community's collective effort to modernize the shelter to an exemplarily standard happened before they were involved.
Sadly, due to the Best Friends and Maddies ideology and doctrines that Outcomes Consulting espouse, PACC shelter now has the same crisis and critical overcapacity as shelters nationwide and an exploding stray population in the community.
Yet Maddies and Best Friends tentacles are still at work trying to extract every bit of monetization from overpopulation shelter crisis which is their BUSINESS MODEL. Pouring thru their abundant literature and videos there is NOT ONE WORD about accessible spay neuter as priority.
The fact that the supervisors have not done due diligence in awarding the 2.5 million contract to Hassen, based on her many fraudulent claims, could be used to resubmit a petition for wasteful spending. They should have made basic inquiries into the PACC foster program that Hassen touted with Dangler to sell her contract to RIVCO to discover it was totally unrealistic without significant funding commitment. I can be contacted thru Animal Politics for more information.
Thank you, Carmen, for taking the time to share your detailed insights and potential evidence related to the Riverside County case. Your observations about Hassen’s consulting practices and the Pima Animal Care Center foster program are valuable and could prove helpful in strengthening the petitioners’ arguments regarding wasteful spending.
I will pass along your information to Dan Bolton, the attorney representing the petitioners, so he can review it further. If he needs additional clarification or follow-up, I’ll let him know how to contact you.
Thank you again for your thoughtful contribution to this important case.
Thank you for this, Carmen- happy to see that Ed will be passing this along to Dan Bolton at Walter Clark Law Group!
So many of us have stepped forward to share information about the inner workings of this dishonest conspiracy and cover up.
It’s long past time that we who have funded this shelter and paid these so called “experts and “leaders” have some real accountability and transparency!! Hooray for these two lawsuits 🐾
Our orphaned animals, along with taxpayers deserve some real transparency and real change. We know the $40 million dollars a year we’ve allocated for this is being squandered left and right.
That $2.5 million for a consultant who is too busy carpetbagging in Los Angeles and other Southern CA shelters to actually show up in Riverside to “consult” and clean up the disaster she and former director Erin Gettis created.
It’s long past time for these glorified dog catchers and their carpetbagging consultants to be exposed for their inhumane Catch/Kill/Render methods of sheltering.
They are feeding the pipeline of animals into the shelters for their own job security by IGNORING the basics like SPAY AND NEUTER!!!!
This is great news Ed and long overdue. The recent incident I sent you about was Riverside allowing a rescue to pull 2 week old puppies from a mother and then immediately took the mother directly to the back room and euthanized her. There reasoning was that she was aggressive!!! New puppies only two weeks old!! I want to offer a 2K reward for information on the rescue that would do that and then let them euthanize the mother. The incident was all over facebook.
Thank you, Nancy, for sharing this troubling incident and for your dedication to advocating for animal welfare. The situation you described is deeply concerning, and I appreciate you bringing it to my attention.
In the future, please feel free to contact me directly when incidents like this arise. This will allow me to better understand the details and intervene where possible. Your insight and commitment are invaluable in the effort to improve shelter practices and protect vulnerable animals.
Thank you again for your support and for staying engaged in this important work.
How humane treatment and fiscal transparency became optional is so tragic. I hope these lawsuits can cause a course correct and everyone prioritizes these beautiful creatures who have no voice without us.
Thank you, Yvonee, for your heartfelt comment. I completely agree—it is tragic that humane treatment and fiscal transparency have become optional to so many orgs. These lawsuits are a crucial step toward holding those in charge accountable and prioritizing the welfare of the animals who rely on us to be their voice.
Your words are a powerful reminder of why this work matters so much. Let’s hope this legal action sparks the course correction we all want to see. Thank you for your support and for being an advocate for these animals.
Hi everyone, I need help. My husky was falsely accused of "injuring" My neighbor and now they are trying to euthanize him. They have no proof. My dog is a goofball and loves people. I requested footage of their ring camera. The hospital records reported there was no animal attack related injuries. I saw my neighbor myself and not once did she mention my dog attacked her. She wasn't bleeding, had no scratches, was not limping and had no bite marks. She was walking perfectly fine. But her allegations and the fact that my husky killed her cat was sufficient for the county to order uthanasia without the chance to get him help. He doesnt have a history of attacking people.
This is not the appropriate forum for addressing these types of concerns. I forwarded your comments to the new executive director at Riverside County Animal Services, Mary Martin. I suspect she, or a representative will contact you soon. Please keep me posted at ed@edboks.com
There's evidence im submitting to the superior court of them lying. I needed help so I was hoping someone would be able to help in any way possible. I also wanted people on here to be aware of this matter. Because I plan on exposing them for lying. Being that they are known to quickly uthenize without trying to help save the animals in need wether it'd be giving enough time to find their owner, giving sick animals care or helping dogs with behavioral issues a chance to see an animal behaviorist. The department is failing in a lot of other matters aside from practicing dishonesty. Im also a tax payer and being that Ive had such a negative and dishonest encounter with them I'm trying to help in every way I can. Not just on this forum but in other ways.
I understand and I am sympathetic. If any of my subscribers can assist you, I encourage them to contact you. I did forward your concerns to the new executive director, Mary Martin, who assured me that she will call you today. Please keep me posted.
Carol, thank you for sharing your concerns about Apple Valley. The issues you’ve raised are deeply troubling and reflect challenges that many shelters face.
While this case specifically focuses on Riverside County, its outcome could set important legal precedents that may influence shelter policies across California, including in Apple Valley. For example, if the court enforces stricter adherence to laws like the Hayden Act, it could encourage shelters statewide to adopt more humane practices, such as extending hold periods and prioritizing adoptions over euthanasia.
Your input underscores how widespread these issues are, and it’s a reminder of how important it is to push for accountability and reform in animal welfare. Thank you again for bringing attention to this critical matter.
Hello from Pima County, AZ referenced in article. Can someone with direct access to petitioners provide this evidence, perhaps helpful, to amend wasteful spending petition.
There is a fairly recent video (I'd have to dig to find it but it's out there perhaps on FB 'Fix our Shelters" or "Cal Animals Exposed"), where Hassen is defending her contract to RIVCO supervisors. She has Monica Dangler beside her (looking uncomfortable at misrepresentations for RIVCO) boasting about how Dangler ran the "largest foster program in US" representing that a substantial foster program could help solve RIVCO's shelter disaster.
She is referring to Pima Animal Care Center (PACC) where Dangler was director until she resigned to join Kristen Hassen at Outcomes Consulting for this contract and presumably others.
The presentation is entirely dishonest. What Hassen doesn't say is such a foster program requires 2-3 foster coordinator positions and A MEDICAL CLINIC TO SUPPORT THE FOSTERS which RIVCO couldn't fund since they haven't funded the basics.
Dogs available for fostering are the big (over 40 lb), elderly, with medical issues, deteriorating from shelter stress. The puppies and super adoptable dogs are not available for foster. The fosters are responsible for all supplies except medical which almost no one would foster a dog needing medical treatment not provided by shelter at today's private clinic prices.
The only reason PACC is a modernized shelter with support programs and a CLINIC is because Tucson community generously passed a 22 million dollar bond issue in 2014 to expand the shelter, previously a 1960's dungeon with around 30% live outcome and no medical care (except vax) not even simple antibiotics. Shelter dogs can now be treated for a range of conditions.
Kristen Hassen was PACC director prior to Dangler (resigned to join Outcomes Consulting). As Director, Dangler ordered several UNNECCESSARY consulting reports for PACC by Outcomes Consulting paid for by Friends of PACC--- the auxiliary funding support. The extent of these wasteful contracts is being investigated. Obviously dirty.
Hassen and Dangler have built this fraudulent resume on the accomplishments of others, the Tucson community's collective effort to modernize the shelter to an exemplarily standard happened before they were involved.
Sadly, due to the Best Friends and Maddies ideology and doctrines that Outcomes Consulting espouse, PACC shelter now has the same crisis and critical overcapacity as shelters nationwide and an exploding stray population in the community.
Yet Maddies and Best Friends tentacles are still at work trying to extract every bit of monetization from overpopulation shelter crisis which is their BUSINESS MODEL. Pouring thru their abundant literature and videos there is NOT ONE WORD about accessible spay neuter as priority.
The fact that the supervisors have not done due diligence in awarding the 2.5 million contract to Hassen, based on her many fraudulent claims, could be used to resubmit a petition for wasteful spending. They should have made basic inquiries into the PACC foster program that Hassen touted with Dangler to sell her contract to RIVCO to discover it was totally unrealistic without significant funding commitment. I can be contacted thru Animal Politics for more information.
Thank you, Carmen, for taking the time to share your detailed insights and potential evidence related to the Riverside County case. Your observations about Hassen’s consulting practices and the Pima Animal Care Center foster program are valuable and could prove helpful in strengthening the petitioners’ arguments regarding wasteful spending.
I will pass along your information to Dan Bolton, the attorney representing the petitioners, so he can review it further. If he needs additional clarification or follow-up, I’ll let him know how to contact you.
Thank you again for your thoughtful contribution to this important case.
Thank you for this, Carmen- happy to see that Ed will be passing this along to Dan Bolton at Walter Clark Law Group!
So many of us have stepped forward to share information about the inner workings of this dishonest conspiracy and cover up.
It’s long past time that we who have funded this shelter and paid these so called “experts and “leaders” have some real accountability and transparency!! Hooray for these two lawsuits 🐾
Our orphaned animals, along with taxpayers deserve some real transparency and real change. We know the $40 million dollars a year we’ve allocated for this is being squandered left and right.
That $2.5 million for a consultant who is too busy carpetbagging in Los Angeles and other Southern CA shelters to actually show up in Riverside to “consult” and clean up the disaster she and former director Erin Gettis created.
It’s long past time for these glorified dog catchers and their carpetbagging consultants to be exposed for their inhumane Catch/Kill/Render methods of sheltering.
They are feeding the pipeline of animals into the shelters for their own job security by IGNORING the basics like SPAY AND NEUTER!!!!
This is great news Ed and long overdue. The recent incident I sent you about was Riverside allowing a rescue to pull 2 week old puppies from a mother and then immediately took the mother directly to the back room and euthanized her. There reasoning was that she was aggressive!!! New puppies only two weeks old!! I want to offer a 2K reward for information on the rescue that would do that and then let them euthanize the mother. The incident was all over facebook.
Thank you, Nancy, for sharing this troubling incident and for your dedication to advocating for animal welfare. The situation you described is deeply concerning, and I appreciate you bringing it to my attention.
In the future, please feel free to contact me directly when incidents like this arise. This will allow me to better understand the details and intervene where possible. Your insight and commitment are invaluable in the effort to improve shelter practices and protect vulnerable animals.
Thank you again for your support and for staying engaged in this important work.
This is so sad!!!!
How humane treatment and fiscal transparency became optional is so tragic. I hope these lawsuits can cause a course correct and everyone prioritizes these beautiful creatures who have no voice without us.
Thank you, Yvonee, for your heartfelt comment. I completely agree—it is tragic that humane treatment and fiscal transparency have become optional to so many orgs. These lawsuits are a crucial step toward holding those in charge accountable and prioritizing the welfare of the animals who rely on us to be their voice.
Your words are a powerful reminder of why this work matters so much. Let’s hope this legal action sparks the course correction we all want to see. Thank you for your support and for being an advocate for these animals.
Abhorrent!!
Hi everyone, I need help. My husky was falsely accused of "injuring" My neighbor and now they are trying to euthanize him. They have no proof. My dog is a goofball and loves people. I requested footage of their ring camera. The hospital records reported there was no animal attack related injuries. I saw my neighbor myself and not once did she mention my dog attacked her. She wasn't bleeding, had no scratches, was not limping and had no bite marks. She was walking perfectly fine. But her allegations and the fact that my husky killed her cat was sufficient for the county to order uthanasia without the chance to get him help. He doesnt have a history of attacking people.
Hi Lilia,
This is not the appropriate forum for addressing these types of concerns. I forwarded your comments to the new executive director at Riverside County Animal Services, Mary Martin. I suspect she, or a representative will contact you soon. Please keep me posted at ed@edboks.com
There's evidence im submitting to the superior court of them lying. I needed help so I was hoping someone would be able to help in any way possible. I also wanted people on here to be aware of this matter. Because I plan on exposing them for lying. Being that they are known to quickly uthenize without trying to help save the animals in need wether it'd be giving enough time to find their owner, giving sick animals care or helping dogs with behavioral issues a chance to see an animal behaviorist. The department is failing in a lot of other matters aside from practicing dishonesty. Im also a tax payer and being that Ive had such a negative and dishonest encounter with them I'm trying to help in every way I can. Not just on this forum but in other ways.
I understand and I am sympathetic. If any of my subscribers can assist you, I encourage them to contact you. I did forward your concerns to the new executive director, Mary Martin, who assured me that she will call you today. Please keep me posted.
Carol, thank you for sharing your concerns about Apple Valley. The issues you’ve raised are deeply troubling and reflect challenges that many shelters face.
While this case specifically focuses on Riverside County, its outcome could set important legal precedents that may influence shelter policies across California, including in Apple Valley. For example, if the court enforces stricter adherence to laws like the Hayden Act, it could encourage shelters statewide to adopt more humane practices, such as extending hold periods and prioritizing adoptions over euthanasia.
Your input underscores how widespread these issues are, and it’s a reminder of how important it is to push for accountability and reform in animal welfare. Thank you again for bringing attention to this critical matter.