Enhancing Accountability from LA Animal Services: Case Study for Animal Activists

Leveraging Legal Tools to Promote Transparency and Hold Unresponsive Officials Accountable

Animal activists often find themselves in a David-and-Goliath struggle when attempting to enact change, especially when dealing with unresponsive or inefficient government agencies. In a previous article, I explored the continuum of activism using Los Angeles Animal Services (LAAS) as a case study.  I discussed collaborative and direct-action tactics to hold unresponsive officials accountable.

Building on that foundation, I now introduce three additional legal tools brought to my attention by an attorney interested in this discussion: taxpayer lawsuits, criminal neglect charges, and Grand Jury Investigations, not to be confused with the Grand Jury Inquiry discussed in the earlier article.  These three tools not only strengthen the collaborative approach but also offer new avenues for holding unresponsive officials accountable.

Expanding the Toolkit: Taxpayer Lawsuits, Criminal Neglect Charges, and Criminal Grand Jury Investigations

Taxpayer Lawsuits

A taxpayer lawsuit can be an effective way to challenge the improper expenditure of public funds by government agencies. Under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 526a, taxpayers have the standing to sue government bodies to prevent illegal expenditures or waste of public funds. This legal avenue allows activists to hold LAAS accountable for mismanagement and ensure that public resources are used appropriately.

For instance, if LAAS is found to be misusing funds allocated for animal welfare, a taxpayer lawsuit could compel the agency to redirect those funds toward more ethical and effective practices. This tool addresses financial mismanagement and checks the agency's accountability. By leveraging this legal mechanism, activists can ensure that public funds are used in a manner that aligns with the community's values and legal standards.

How to Initiate a Taxpayer Lawsuit:

1. Gather Evidence: Collect documentation and evidence of the alleged misuse of public funds. This could include financial records, internal reports, and witness statements.

2. Consult an Attorney: Seek legal advice from an attorney experienced in public interest or animal welfare law. They can help assess the strength of your case and guide you through the legal process.

3. File the Lawsuit: With the assistance of your attorney, file the lawsuit in the appropriate court. The complaint should detail the allegations and the legal basis for the lawsuit.

4. Publicize the Case: Raise public awareness about the lawsuit to garner support and put additional pressure on the agency to address the issues.

Case Example: LA County Animal Control

A pertinent example of a taxpayer lawsuit occurred in 2009 when volunteers of Los Angeles County Animal Care and Control (DACC) filed a lawsuit against the county. The lawsuit was initiated after repeated complaints about the agency's failure to adequately care for animals and misuse of public funds. The volunteers argued that the county's actions constituted gross negligence and misuse of public funds. The lawsuit was successful, and the court ruled in favor of the volunteers, compelling the county to make significant changes to its operations. This case underscores the power of taxpayer lawsuits in compelling government agencies to adhere to their responsibilities and ensure public safety and welfare.

Criminal Neglect Charges

Filing criminal neglect charges is another potent tool. Under California Penal Code Section 597, it is a crime to intentionally neglect, harm, or kill an animal. This statute provides a legal basis for prosecuting individuals or entities responsible for animal cruelty or neglect. If there is evidence that LAAS has engaged in such conduct, activists can push for criminal investigations and charges.

How to Initiate Criminal Neglect Charges:

1. Document Evidence: Collect detailed evidence of neglect or cruelty, including photographs, veterinary reports, and witness statements.

2. Report to Authorities: File a report with local law enforcement or animal control agencies. Provide all collected evidence to support your claims.

3. Engage the DA: Contact the District Attorney's office to request an investigation and potential prosecution. Provide a comprehensive dossier of evidence and any legal arguments.

4. Public Advocacy: Use media and public advocacy to raise awareness and put pressure on authorities to act.

To ensure that the use of criminal neglect charges does not lead to an increase in euthanasia rates in an effort to obfuscate the facts, activists should focus on specific aspects of humane care that do not directly relate to euthanasia decisions.

These aspects include:

1. Proper Shelter and Housing: Ensuring that animals have clean, safe, and appropriate living conditions.

2. Adequate Food and Water: Guaranteeing that animals receive sufficient nutrition and hydration.

3. Medical Care: Providing timely and adequate veterinary care for sick or injured animals.

4. Behavioral Enrichment: Implementing programs to address the mental and emotional well-being of animals, such as socialization and exercise.

By concentrating on these areas, activists can advocate for humane treatment without giving LAAS a pretext to euthanize more animals. I explain this pretext later. The goal is to improve the overall standards of care and ensure that neglect and cruelty are addressed through legal channels.

Criminal Grand Jury Investigations

Another powerful tool is the criminal grand jury investigation. Unlike a civil grand jury discussed in the earlier article, which investigates and makes recommendations on public agencies, a criminal grand jury can issue indictments for criminal conduct. This route is particularly useful when the District Attorney (DA) is unwilling to pursue charges. A criminal grand jury has the authority to investigate potential criminal conduct and issue indictments, leading to prosecutions.

How to Initiate a Criminal Grand Jury Investigation:

1. Collect Evidence: Gather substantial evidence of criminal conduct, similar to the process for criminal neglect charges.

2. Engage Legal Counsel: Work with an attorney to prepare a detailed presentation of the evidence and legal arguments.

3. Submit to the Grand Jury: Petition the grand jury through the District Attorney's office or directly if allowed. Provide a comprehensive dossier of evidence and request an investigation.

4. Public Pressure: Use media campaigns and public advocacy to raise awareness and encourage the grand jury to take action.

Case Example: Allegations Against LAAS

Readers of my previous article have informed me of several troubling allegations against LAAS:

• Failure to Enforce Spay/Neuter Laws: Despite having millions of dollars in donations to the Animal Welfare Trust Fund, LAAS reportedly refuses to enforce spay/neuter laws or establish meaningful low-cost or free spay/neuter clinics.

• Ending the STAR Program: This donation and grant funded program which provided medical care to abused, neglected, injured and sick shelter animals has allegedly been terminated without explanation.

• Mislabeling Dogs as "Behavioral": There are claims that LAAS mislabels dogs as "behavioral" to justify euthanizing them without affecting the live release rate. This practice allegedly allows them to kill dogs more quickly.

• Unresponsiveness to Offers of Assistance: LAAS has been described as unresponsive to offers of assistance from the public, trainers, veterinarians, and other professionals, even when such help would come at no cost to the agency. This allegedly includes ignoring offers of substantial donations.

• Misuse of Medications: Reports suggest that LAAS may be misusing Trazodone and Gabapentin to manage and/or mask undesirable canine behaviors.

• Unresponsive to Rescue Organizations:  There are numerous complaints that LAAS is unresponsive to rescue organizations asking to "pull" animals, resulting in many unnecessary euthanasias.

These allegations, if documented, could provide grounds for criminal neglect charges or a criminal grand jury investigation to hold LAAS accountable. By focusing on specific aspects of humane care—such as proper shelter and housing, adequate food and water, timely medical care, and behavioral enrichment—the aim is to compel LAAS to improve their standards without them resorting to euthanasia to make the problems "go away." Let me explain.

Humane Euthanasia

It has been reported that the leadership at both LA County DACC and LA City Animal Services have decided to implement “humane euthanasia” when public scrutiny becomes uncomfortable.  That is, rather than ask the community for help, fight for an appropriate budget, or raise funds for humane programs, they will take the easy way out and euthanize enough animals to take the pressure off. 

This would not an unusual decision for department heads across the country, given the untenable position elected officials put them in.  If department heads express too much compassion, they can be easily replaced.  I explore this dilemma in a white paper called The Ethical Imperative of Animal Welfare: Exploring the Moral Landscape Where Humanity and Animal Lives Intersect.

The article is worth the read, but you can get the gist from its opening paragraph: “In many communities, decisions regarding animal welfare are complicated by a host of competing priorities. When evaluating competing priorities it’s easy to look to the bottom line. When that happens, the questions of conscience concerning animal welfare can be overlooked.”  Until elected officials understand how important animal welfare is to their constituents, they will continue to betray their own conscience to strengthen the bottom line, putting conscientious department heads in a moral dilemma.  That’s why activists are well advised to include upstream decision-makers in their strategies.

Conclusion

The continuum of activism encompasses various collaborative tactics, each playing a crucial role in driving social change. The situation with Los Angeles Animal Services underscores the necessity of utilizing all available tools, including taxpayer lawsuits,  criminal neglect charges, grand jury inquiries; and grand jury investigations, to hold unresponsive officials accountable and advocate for animal welfare.

Collaborative efforts can build lasting change through systemic reform, ensuring that public funds are used ethically and that those responsible for neglect and cruelty face legal consequences. Together, these approaches form a comprehensive strategy for achieving meaningful and impactful progress in the fight for animal welfare, ensuring that the commitment to safeguarding animals remains unwavering. 

Disclaimer

The allegations mentioned in this article are based on reports from readers and require further verification. The intent of this article is to promote public interest and animal welfare by encouraging responsible and ethical practices.

The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and is not intended to be legal advice. I am not a lawyer. For specific legal advice, please consult with a qualified legal professional.

Ed Boks is a former Executive Director of the New York City, Los Angeles, and Maricopa County Animal Care & Control Departments. He is available for consultations. His work has been published in the LA Times, New York Times, Newsweek, Real Clear Policy, Sentient Media, and now on Animal Politics with Ed Boks.