Employees Protest Firing of Head of Sonoma County Agency; Troubled Department Has Had Three Directors Since 2006
By STU WOO
SANTA ROSA — Sonoma County's animal care and control department is in an uproar over the sudden dismissal of its director, the latest flap for an agency that has an outsize importance in a heavily rural area.
The ruckus began in July when director Amy Cooper was fired. Her supervisor, county agricultural commissioner Cathy Neville, called it a "personnel issue" but said she couldn't elaborate because of labor laws.
Ms. Cooper's dismissal surprised some colleagues and others who worked with the agency on animal-welfare issues. County supervisors have credited Ms. Cooper with turning around a troubled department. During her yearlong tenure, animal-care employees said she lowered the county's euthanasia rate and improved relationships with local animal-welfare groups, such as the Sonoma Humane Society.
In the wake of the firing, Ms. Cooper's former employees protested, partly by taking out a half-page newspaper ad starring a dejected-looking dog. In addition, 28 of the department's 32 employees signed a letter to county supervisors demanding Ms. Cooper's reinstatement.
"We were headed to the Super Bowl, and then our quarterback was let go," said Bob Garcia, a 35-year veteran of the department who is temporarily managing the agency until Ms. Cooper is replaced.
Ms. Cooper, through her attorney Jeremy Fietz, declined to comment. Mr. Fietz said Ms. Cooper was given no explanation for the dismissal, which he said shocked her because she had received only positive feedback.
Ms. Neville declined to comment on why she discharged Ms. Cooper. Ms. Cooper was let go two days before the end of her probationary period, during which she could be sacked at any time for any reason.
Mr. Garcia and Cathy Fenn, the animal shelter's manager, said Ms. Neville told them that she wanted Ms. Cooper to do more outreach and fund-raising.
Ms. Neville said she never said that to Mr. Garcia and Ms. Fenn. She added that Ms. Cooper was "great" with outreach and had started a donation program.
The flap has broad implications for Sonoma County. While animal-care units in urban areas such as San Francisco are mostly identified with controlling cat and dog populations, the Sonoma department also has to deal with the largely agricultural county's large population of livestock and other animals.
"You're dealing with the issues of people's pets, and you're dealing with the animals that impact agriculture," said Jim Leddy, Sonoma's community- and governmental-affairs manager.
Sonoma County's animal care and control agency has battled negative publicity in the past decade, during which it was subject to two grand-jury investigations. The first came in 2004, after a shelter employee adopted an emu, killed it and planned to serve it at a staff barbecue. That investigation resulted in a report recommending that the department hire more staffers and give better training to employees.
In 2006, the animal shelter had to rescind a pit-bull puppy euthanasia policy after local animal groups complained. A grand jury last year also investigated complaints about the department, but determined it was doing a commendable job overall. The grand-jury report recommended the agency add a full-time dispatcher at the center and stop using inmate labor at the shelter, among other things. Shelter officials they have been addressing those issues.
Ms. Cooper, 49 years old, was the agency's third non-interim director since 2006. The Novato resident served as director of an Idaho animal shelter before Ms. Neville hired her last summer.
Once at the agency, employees said, Ms. Cooper reduced the county's euthanasia rate from 43% to 28%, secured donations to build new livestock housing and a dog park, started a newsletter called "Paw Prints," and boosted staff morale. Mr. Garcia called her the "best director" the shelter has ever had.
But some residents still had concerns. "There was still a ways to go" for the agency, said RJ Kamprath, an animal-welfare activist and local gadfly. The 68-year-old Santa Rosa resident said she met with Ms. Cooper four times during her tenure. Ms. Kamprath said she liked Ms. Cooper, but was concerned that she didn't follow up on her own proposal to use the county's spay-and-neuter van to reach outlying, low-income areas. Ms. Kamprath also said it was difficult to obtain information to support the department's statistics.
Mr. Fietz, Ms. Cooper's attorney, said that "given the state of the animal care and control department when Amy was hired," those criticisms "are extraordinarily minor."
On July 12, Ms. Cooper was dismissed. Mr. Fietz said his client isn't seeking to sue the county at this time but remains mystified by her exit. "Her job performance was exemplary," he said.
Department employees quickly reacted, running an ad in the Santa Rosa Press Democrat last month calling for Ms. Cooper's reinstatement.
The chairwoman of Sonoma County's board of supervisors, Valerie Brown, said she and her fellow supervisors also were "not happy" that they were blindsided by the dismissal. Ms. Brown had praised Ms. Cooper's work at an April board meeting and said the supervisors thought the director was doing a superb job.
Still, Ms. Brown said it is unlikely the board would overrule Ms. Neville and reinstate Ms. Cooper because it would set a bad precedent.
In addition, leaders of the agricultural community have praised Ms. Neville for her work as agricultural commissioner.
"She's done a really excellent job trying to connect with the growers," said Nick Frey, president of the Sonoma County Winegrape Commission, a nonprofit marketing group.
Later this month, county supervisors will consider putting animal care under the direction of another agency, such as the sheriff's department, or making it a stand-alone department.
Mr. Fietz said he has had preliminary discussions with county officials about the possibility of Ms. Cooper's return if the animal-care department were moved out of the agricultural commissioner's office.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704147804575456180400934198.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_News_SanFranciscoBayArea68_2
No comments:
Post a Comment