COMPREHENSIVE RESPONSE TO PRESS 
SOCIETY OF ST. LUCIE FACTS

THE INSPECTION

At approximately 1:55 PM, September 14, 2018, a ?ve member Animal Shelter
Standards Committee together with at least seven other individuals with
varying agenda, descended, unannounced, upon the Glades Shelter. It is
unfortunate that the press seized upon that disruption of our operations to
promulgate a false narrative of the efforts of our dedicated staff and volunteers.

Having in excess of 12 people swarm the facility and disrupt its operation is unfair,
unprofessional and not conducive to a productive conversation. Obviously, the

AS SC coordinated this ?visit? with the other attendees. Neither the visit nor the
unfair and selective reporting does anything to improve the lives of those animals
entrusted to our care. The Fort Pierce contract speci?es that the City Manager, the
Animal Control Manager and Animal Control Of?cers may make unannounced
inspections, not that they bring along a posse, including disgruntled former
volunteers.

the ?visit? occurred at the end of the employees? lunch period which is 1:00
PM to 2:00 PM. The animals are fed at 11:00 and thus the time chosen by the
?visitors? is the precise time that the animals? meals would likely be processed, a
fact known to the former volunteers accompanying the committee. Ordinarily, it is
after lunch that the rounds and cleaning of the kennels would be performed, a fact
not evidenced in the reporting. The kennels do not have individual attendants that
monitor each animal?s excretory cycles. Common sense dictates that at various
times evidence of canine bodily functions will be present in individual kennels.

The press remarked on the lack of air conditioning and high temperatures. The
professional architects, specializing in the design of shelters, advised against the
installation of air-conditioning since, in their opinion, air conditioning is conducive
to the spread of infection and disease. Fans are utilized to offset high
temperatures. Any noted ?failed electrical outlets? was a temporary condition that
has been remedied.

 

The timing of the visit, three and four days before the renewal of contracts with the
City of Fort Pierce and St. Lucie County respectively, evidences a deliberate
attempt by certain private individuals to purposely interfere with contractual
relationships and exacerbates rather than ameliorates a situation brought on in large
part to the inadequate compensation for services that these jurisdictions pay. No,
the Humane Society is not ?raking in hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.?
Rather, it is subsidizing the costs of providing care and shelter for the City?s (Fort
Pierce) and County?s (St. Lucie County?s and Port St. Lucie?s) animals.

Reports on the 9/ 14/ 1 8 inspection were provided on or about 9/24/ 18 to the media
and via the County Attorney?s of?ce to the Humane Society. The report by the
veterinarian, Dr. Wassennan, indicated that, ?overall runs were clean and all dogs
had clean water.? This certainly does not comport with the pejorative
proclamations in the media.

THE FINANCIAL ISSUES

As of April 30, 2018, our Certi?ed Public Accountant prepared an analysis of the
operating costs of both shelters and governmental revenue to provide context and
documentation for negotiations that began in May. That analysis demonstrates that
the total operating costs for both shelters during the seven month period (10/1/2017
through 4/3 0/18) were $445,023. The operating costs are net of fundraising, thrift
store, clinic and mortgage expenses and non? governmental income shelter
operations income for services). During this seven month period the total accrued
governmental income was $298,958. This represents a de?cit of $146,065. The
Humane Society has repeatedly brought its operational de?cit to the attention of
the governmental entities. To bridge the gap between the costs of services
provided to the City?s and County?s animals and contractual income, the Humane
Society embarked upon new fundraisers, such as Paws in the Park and the Putt for
Paws Golf Classic and initiated capital campaign efforts. Two years ago we
started a pro?table Thrift Store. The store has signi?cantly added to our bottom
line. The Board has eliminated the position of Executive Director, reduced
employees? salaries, cut hours, eliminated and reduced bene?ts and enlisted
volunteers. Our dedicated employees have gone without raises for several years.
Most work at minimal wage. While the Humane Society has stepped up to serve
the animals entrusted to it, the jurisdictions have repeatedly failed to suf?ciently

 

pay for the actual services provided. Adequate compensation for services, not
political posturing and ??nger pointing, is needed.

FORT COLD SHOULDER

On June 4, 2018, the Humane Society hand delivered and emailed a letter to each
Fort Pierce Commissioner to plead the case of the animals and convey our
?nancial circumstances. A copy of that letter is attached. Not one commissioner
reached out to us or responded in any way. I ?nd Mr. Perona?s comment noting a
lack of response from the board (to the news article and press) curious at best. Mr.
Mimms? comment that, ?we want a dialogue with their board? is a complete
reversal of his refusal to meet in May when we requested a meeting with him to
plead our case on behalf of the animals. Likewise, Mr. Sessions comment that,
know this agency isn?t looking stable in terms of its longevity and its ability
to provide this service? is disingenuous at best given his and the other
commissioners? failure to engage in a conversation over four months ago when we
reached out to them on behalf of the animals.

Over the past several years, in the course of negotiations with the City and County,
the Humane Society has communicated its aggressive cost cutting and underscored
its ?nancial needs occasioned, in part, by diminished and unpredictable bequests
but mainly due to inadequate payments for services. In August, the City of Fort
Pierce requested that we justify a $3,000. increase to our contract. In May, through
Ms. Arraiz, the City initially proposed a $3,000. increase, commenting that Mr.
Mimms had authority to approve more than $3,000. However, as noted above,
Mr. Mimms declined to meet with us despite our request. It should be noted that
the City of Fort Pierce 2018/2019 budget for Community Response/Code
Enforcement is $1,057,212, representing an increase of almost 11.5% over the
prior year?s budget of $948,661. The yearly budget increase for the Code
Compliance Department is $108,551. Despite the swelling of their budget, the
City chooses to hold the dogs and cats in our care hostage to their unfair
negotiating tactics and de?cient compensation.

THE HUMANE SOCIETY WELCOMES PRODUCTIVE DIALOGUE

The Humane Society Board of Directors is presently comprised of seven
volunteers. It is not a static group. Our former chairman, met with Mr. Parrish and

Mr. Bremer on September 10, 2018, at Mr. Parrish?s request. A frank discussion
ensued. At that time both gentlemen advised they would support the renewal of
the contract. These gentlemen conceded that further cost cutting was not a
solution. Mr. Bremer?s recent comments that, ?they (Humane Society) don?t have
the funds, they start to cut back and create issues,? and, talking about
living beings, living animals that could suffer the consequences, are interesting, if
not offensive. We agree. Further cost cutting is not an option; proper funding is.
The reason the Humane Society does not have suf?cient funds is that it has for
years subsidized a major portion of the costs of the services rendered. On the
average, jurisdictions pay about $130. per intake (animal). That amount is totally
inadequate to cover the average stay (exceeding 20 days) for an animal, its food, its
medical care, neutering or spaying, kennel cleaning and so much more. The
Humane Society has been forced to cut back because the jurisdictions have not
stepped up. Since Mr. Bremer is genuinely concerned about living animals
suffering consequences I ask him to rally behind us and the animals by eliminating
the large gap between our costs and their payments.

MISINFORMATION IS NOT PRODUCTIVE

Susan Parry, one of the seven individuals accompanying the ASSC, assigns blame
for the Humane Society?s ?money problems? on the building of the Glades shelter
and alleges that donations are down and some prominent donors have withdrawn
their support. To my knowledge Ms. Parry, whose husband was a Humane Society
of St. Lucie, Inc. board member before he heatedly resigned in 2006, did not
engage any current board member to discuss these assumptions. The Humane
Society has not recently had prominent donors so it is unclear what donors have
withdrawn their support. Ms. Townsend apparently voiced a similar comment that
several prominent donors have pulled their funding. I don?t know the source of
her comments and have no idea what donors she references. Ms. Townsend has
never contacted us or communicated any concerns. In August our then board chair
offered, in conversation with Ms. Bartz?s office, to meet with the Commissioner
and advised her assistant that staff would also be made available. Ms. Bartz?s
of?ce never responded to that offer. I would hope that politicians so receptive to
hearing from former volunteers and others, whose agendas do nothing to advance
the cause of animals, would engage us with whom they are contractually obligated.

Hopefully, the unfair press will not adversely impact future contributions to the
Humane Society?s mission.

Opining that the Glades shelter strains the Humane Society?s resources does
nothing to advance the cause of animals. The Glades shelter has provided home to
9,473 animals since it opened November 18, 2013 according to our Pet Point
computer data. What would their plight have been if Glades had not been opened
to offer them care and hope? Half of our dedicated staff at the shelters is paid
minimum wage. They don?t have the generous bene?ts afforded City of Fort
Pierce and County employees. Many if not most shelters pay at least $100,000. to
an executive director. We have no executive director. We are a nonpro?t. We are
not a governmental entity that simply ordains a tax increase to cover its poor
management and oversight. This year the City of Fort Pierce incurred an
$810,000. loss operating the Sunrise Theater; the Indian Hills Golf Course
continues to run at a de?cit and required a bail out of $358,000. in February. In
2017 the City of Fort Pierce agreed to a negotiated settlement of $990,000. to settle
a lawsuit as a result of its decision to reject a detox center. Thus, it is rich that Fort
Pierce preaches to us on cost saving measures when they are hardly good stewards
of taxpayer monies. Perhaps if they better managed taxpayer funds, they could pay
for the services they demand the Humane Society subsidize. The City should
accept us as a partner rather than deride our intentions and efforts. Unlike the City
that has a captive tax base, we rely on the generosity of people who share our
passion for the wellbeing of animals, Whose only voice is ours.

UNJUSTIFIED COMPLAINTS

The City and County cannot justi?ably complain that the animal to staff ratio is
inadequate when they do not cover the present costs. By way of example, half of
our employees make the minimum wage. As of May 7, 2018, the average hourly
wage of 11 code compliance employees employed by the City of Fort Pierce was
$19.52, almost two and a half times the hourly wage of half of our employees.
Fort Pierce and County employees receive health insurance; ours do not. Fort
Pierce and County employees get double the number of paid holidays per year.
They get yearly salary increases; our employees do not.

The Glades shelter has a veterinarian on site three days a week. The Savannah
Road shelter has a veterinarian on site 2 days a week. Would the Humane Society
prefer a veterinarian on site at both shelter ?ve days a week? Of course, it would,
but given the jurisdictions do not pay the costs of the services we now provide, that
is not a reasonable expectation.

MOVING FORWARD TOGETHER

As part of her inspection comments Dr. Wasserman wrote, ?we all need to not
point ?ngers but instead ?nd ways to help rectify the current problems that the
Humane Society is dealing with.? We agree. The challenges the Humane Society
faces have no single cause. Overpopulation is due to the fact that we are an open
admissions shelter and try to prolong shelter stays as long as possible. We assist
the County and City in performing a function they are statutorily required to
perform. We provide food, water, shelter and medical care to every animal
brought to us. Simply stated, those with the duty and taxing authority have to step
up; we cannot continue to subsidize the costs of providing services.

The Humane Society remains grateful to those who support its mission and are
willing to assist in performing that mission. The animals are not helped by
criticism motivated by personal agenda. The Humane Society Board is committed
to use its limited resources to provide for the animals entrusted to the Humane
Society. Holding contracts in abeyance jeopardizes the lives of animals. We ask

the City and County to join us in rallying behind those animals that rely on us to
plead their cause.

Submitted by Mary Jean Navaretta, Chairman, Humane Society of St. Lucie
County, Inc.