APS probe to address concerns Questions on adoptions and wildlife center have emerged Originally published in: Chapel Hill Herald Thursday, September 05, 2002 Edition: Final Page: 1 By Rob Shapard rshapard@heraldsun.com; 732-6397 CHAPEL HILL - Orange County Manager John Link and his staff will look into concerns raised about the Animal Protection Society of Orange County and report back to the County Commissioners on Oct. 1. Chapel Hill resident Judith Reitman started a push for a public forum on the APS last month, after trying to adopt a dog from the animal shelter in Chapel Hill operated by the APS. And now several APS employees at the society's Wildlife Rehabilitation Center and animal clinic in Mebane are voicing concerns, about issues such as the control of disease among animals under APS care. At least a couple of angles have emerged. For one, Reitman is questioning the APS policy for adoption of animals from the shelter and the appeals process when adoptions are denied. Reitman sought to adopt a male Spaniel mix called Casey after the dog had been named as a "Pet of the Week." But after the APS did further testing of the dog's temperament, it reported that the dog was very aggressive and too dangerous to be adopted. The dog was euthanized in late August. The second angle - concerns raised by employees of the wildlife center in Mebane - is separate from the adoption issue. However, the wildlife center and the animal shelter both fall under the responsibility of the APS. The APS operates the animal shelter through a contract with the Orange County government, for a total of about $429,000 in the current fiscal year, with the county owning the building. The Wildlife Rehabilitation Center also is operated by the APS, but on privately owned land and not through a contract with the county. The center was in the news earlier this summer, when Bobby Schopler left after a contract dispute with the APS. Schopler had been veterinarian and director at the center for five years, but he left in July after taking issue with some conditions in the contract offered by the APS. At the Orange County Commissioners meeting Tuesday, APS employee Stacy Hughes publicly aired some of her concerns about the wildlife center and clinic in Mebane, where she's worked for two years. She didn't refer specifically to Schopler, but she stated in part that the center currently has no veterinary care for wildlife. She said that APS management was not following a consistent policy for "protecting healthy animals and controlling the spread of disease," among animals such as cats and dogs in the care of APS, and that there were concerns about the treatment of birds without the proper federal license. "We would like to reiterate that our intent here is not to bash the APS," Hughes said. "We hope that by coming forward we can force into the open these issues and bring about positive change. It has taken a lot of courage for us to speak tonight, and we hope that in doing so you will take seriously our statements, and provide us with help in correcting these issues." Melanie Piazza, manager of the wildlife center, also submitted a statement to the County Commissioners, along with Cari Clifford, a surgical assistant at the center and clinic; employee Laura Kellner; and former surgical assistant Wendy McCall, who resigned from her job with the APS in August. Each described similar concerns about the control of disease among animals, and Piazza stated that she believes there is "just a shell of a wildlife center remaining." She also referred to the lack of a federal migratory-bird permit required for treating songbirds and birds of prey. "Wildlife center staff was put in the untenable position of unwittingly advertising for and providing for an illegal service to the community," Piazza stated. APS executive director Laura Walters, who was at the meeting Tuesday, said Wednesday that the APS has stopped accepting migra tory birds at the center. Veterinarian Kris Bergstrand and attorney Margie Huggins also spoke at the meeting, expressing concerns about the APS, and Reitman repeated her call for a public forum on such APS-related issues. She also is arguing that, since the animal shelter relies on a large chunk of public money, the APS should be subject to state rules for open meetings and public records in its operation of the shelter. Reitman said outright that the goal of looking into the APS would be to "clean house." Walters said Wednesday that the meetings of the APS board of directors already are open to the public. She said that records the APS provides to county agencies are public, but she said the society needs to keep some records private, in cases such as the investigation of animal cruelty. In addition to asking the county manager to report back to them next month, the commissioners asked County Attorney Geof Gledhill to weigh in on the question of meetings and records, related to the APS. "The APS is confident in the operation of the animal shelter and the other programs," Walters said Wednesday. "We're completely open to working with the county to make any improvements, and we appreciate the input." Durham County government has a similar arrangement with the APS of Durham, contracting with the organization to run the animal shelter in that county. The contract in this fiscal year is for $301,000. Susan Teer, vice president of the APS of Durham's board of directors and board liaison to the animal shelter, said her board's meetings are open to the public. Some APS records from the shelter are public, while the APS keeps others confidential, she said. Durham County Attorney Chuck Kitchen said he wasn't aware of the issue of public meetings and records coming up with the APS of Durham, which, as in Orange County, is a private entity and not a county department. But he held off saying exactly what rules would apply to the APS, stating, "We don't represent [APS] and we don't give them legal advice." Orange Commissioners Chairman Barry Jacobs said Wednesday that he wanted to get more information from Link before calling for any additional steps. But he said all the concerns lead him to feel there may be problems to address. "I'd be surprised if, given all the smoke, there isn't a little fire," Jacobs said. "But I also realize that [running the shelter] is a thankless job that opens itself up to endless second-guessing, so I'm reserving judgment. "I just want to make sure we're doing the right thing by all the humans and all the animals involved with our shelters, the APS and our community," he said. "I have every confidence that the APS board and executive director are dedicated and mean well. But if there are problems, we need to identify them and correct them. Lives are at stake, literally. And allegations, unsubstantiated or otherwise, flying around tend to wound people." ________________________________________________________________ Outside review of animal shelter planned APS supports county move to review contract, procedures Originally published in: Chapel Hill Herald Thursday, October 03, 2002 Edition: Final Page: 1 By Rob Shapard rshapard@heraldsun.com; 732-6397 CHAPEL HILL - County officials will take an in-depth look at the animal shelter on Airport Road, even to the point of considering whether they want to continue hiring the Animal Protection Socie ty to run the shelter. Orange County owns the animal shelter itself, but it pays the private, not-for-profit Animal Protection Society of Orange County to operate the facility, with the contract paying $429,000 in the current fiscal year. County Manager John Link is asking county commissioners to think about exactly what they want the shelter to be, and to consider hiring an outside group to assess APS' operation of the shelter. That idea drew solid verbal support from Orange County Commissioners on Tuesday, although details haven't been worked out. Orange County Health Director Rosemary Summers told commissioners that both APS and the county would have to seek the assessment together. The county's staff pointed to the Humane Society of the United States and the American Humane Association as two groups that have done comprehensive reviews of shelters around the country. Link projects the cost would range from $8,000 to $20,000 and he recommends the county pay the entire cost out of its contingency fund. "I think it's an excellent idea," APS Director Laura Walters said Wednesday. "We have a good relationship with the [Humane Society of the U.S.]. I work with them all the time now, and I'm certain ly open to having them come in." Link and commissioners are reacting to concerns initially raised by Chapel Hill resident Judith Reitman, who tried to adopt a male spaniel mix called Casey after the dog had been named as a "Pet of the Week." After the APS did further testing of the dog's temperament, it ruled that the dog was very aggressive and too dangerous to be adopted. The dog was euthanized in August. Reitman has questioned the society's adoption policies, as well as things like disease-control practices, and access to records and to meetings of the society's board of directors. She's pushing for a public forum and has said the goal of looking into the APS' practices should be to "clean house." Last month, four APS employees and one former employee said they also had concerns about APS' efforts to control disease among animals and the operation of the Wildlife Rehabilitation Center in Mebane without the federal permit required for treating song birds and birds of prey. The employees worked at the wildlife center and not the animal shelter. The wildlife center had been run by APS with no Orange County funds and on private property, as part of the Felicite Latane Sanctuary. But APS recently decided to close the wildlife center temporarily, with the goal of reopening it in February. The employees of the center were notified in late September that they would lose their jobs with APS in two weeks, although they would be able to apply for jobs at the society's clinic in Mebane. Commissioners last month asked Link and his staff to report back, which they did Tuesday in the form of a 103-page report. The report includes a letter from veterinarians Dwight Bellinger, interim director of the Division of Laboratory Animal Medicine at UNC, and Richard Fish, director of University Animal Resources at N.C. State University. At the direction of the commissioners and Link, Summers brought Fish and Bellinger in to inspect the animal shelter on Sept. 17 and report their findings. The two vets stated, as caveats, that they had limited experience with animal-shelter practices, and that they did not review any written procedures or records of diseases at the Airport Road shelter. But they reported in part: "The facility was uniformly clean and tidy, and animals appeared to be well cared for. It was apparent that shelter staff invest a great deal of effort in sanitation." Nevertheless, they stated that sanitation practices should be reviewed, particularly relating to how long bleach solutions can sit around before being changed out. The solutions are used for cleaning and for things like "foot baths" for shoes. They also said the ideal would be to hold incoming animals in a quarantine room for a week before any public contact, and not to keep newly arrived animals in the same room with other animals. "One particular concern at the shelter was that drop-off animals were in a room with queens/litters," they stated. "This exposes the potentially most vulnerable animals to new arrivals of un known health status." Walters said Wednesday that the society will change out the bleach solutions every day, rather than weekly. She said the society already tries to keep dogs away from the public for seven days, and it will now do so with other animals as well. She said the set-up for dropping off animals has been changed so that the new animals aren't dropped off at night into an area occupied by animals already in the shelter. The shelter did experience an outbreak of panleukopenia this summer, in which about 40 kittens died and the APS euthanized another 70, as recommended by veterinarians and the animal lab at N.C. State, Walters said. She said the outbreak started in west ern North Carolina and swept across the state. "It's been a real shame, but there was nothing to stop it from moving from the western part [of N.C.] to the eastern part," she said. As for parvovirus, she said there have been cases in dogs in the shelter on Airport Road, but that the cases have been isolated. "That is something that, when it comes through, it can sweep through a shelter and kill every animal in there," she said. "In our shelter, we've had isolated cases. "When we find out there is parvo in the shelter, the animal is immediately euthanized," she said. "We've never had a mass parvo outbreak, and many shelters have." On Tuesday, Commissioner Steve Halkiotis said he's gotten so many e-mails related to the animal shelter and APS that his computer's hard drive is ready to explode. He said he wants commissioners to set up a special meeting to start talking about the issues and possible steps. Commissioner Moses Carey said he supported the idea of an independent assessment of the shelter. He said that, over the years, commissioners have made decisions about renewing the contract with APS to run the shelter without having all the facts they needed to consider. Link said commissioners should look at all the options, such as keeping the arrangement with APS or going another route. They should decide what kinds of policies they support for adoptions, disease control, euthanasia and other matters, and then the county and APS would have to decide whether they could continue as partners, Link said. The meeting was well attended, with audience members sitting wedding-style on both sides of the aisle. One side applauded three speakers critical of the APS, while the other side applaud ed a speaker praising the society. Jennifer Reed actually got applause from both sides. She said she had worked for the APS at the animal shelter as well as at the wildlife center, and that she supported the idea of an outside assessment. "We all need to step back and look at what our goal is," she said. "We all want the same thing. We all want to protect ani mals." ________________________________________________________________ Review of the APS shelter warranted Originally published in: Chapel Hill Herald Monday, October 07, 2002 Edition: Final Page: 4 Though expensive, the cost of an outside assessment of the Orange County Animal Shelter would be money well spent. Year after year, the commissioners OK an agreement for the Animal Protection Society to run the shelter, which the county owns. The contract for the current fiscal year is $429,000, a not insub stantial figure. Every so often, the shelter also comes under fire for its practices and policies. This year has been particularly controversial, first with the abrupt departure/ejection of wildlife veterinarian Bobby Schopler, then complaints by resident Judith Reitman who was denied a dog the shelter ruled too aggres sive and euthanized. Though personality clashes seem a source of some of the problems, the shelter's basic functions also have been questioned, which makes county action necessary and scrutiny of the operation appropriate. With Schopler, the root issue was a question of priorities, the shelter's domestic animal priority versus Schopler's emphasis on wildlife. Reitman has raised concerns about adoption and appeal procedures, and others have criticized disease control. A review could reassure the community and officials that taxpayer money is supporting a quality shelter, or it could show the need for a different arrangement. Given the amount of money the county spends, it needs to have a firm grasp on how the money's being spent; this is true whether it's a county department or a county contractor. This is also an opportunity for the county to specify the shelter's mission. The shelter should represent the wishes of the community, and the commissioners have to define what priorities are most important. Specifically, as county manager John Link stated, the commissioners should decide what kinds of policies they support for adoptions, disease control, euthanasia and other matters. The outside review and a county assessment of priorities can only improve the shelter, but until some consensus is reached the operation will remain unsettled. The situation would be worsened if shelter officials did not cooperate with the scrutiny, but Executive Director Laura Walters is commendably agreeable, even though it could cost the APS its contract. "I think it's an excellent idea," Walters said of an outside review. It is a step the county should take. ________________________________________________________________ Commissioners to weigh shelter review, wildlife center Monday Originally published in: Chapel Hill Herald Sunday, October 27, 2002 Edition: Final Page: 1 BY RAY GRONBERG gronberg@heraldsun.com; 918-1032 CHAPEL HILL - A Monday work session will give the Orange County Commissioners a chance to weigh the pros and cons of hiring an outside consultant to evaluate the county animal shelter. Commissioners also plan to discuss veterinarian Bobby Schopler's proposal that they contribute land, money or both to help establish a wildlife center capable of caring for wild animals from across the Triangle. The session will give commissioners the chance to hear from the public, members of the county health board and the leaders of the Animal Protection Society, the group that runs the animal shelter on the county's behalf. It takes place at 7 p.m. in the Southern Human Services Center, which is off Homestead Road in Chapel Hill. It comes amid a continuing squabble over the shelter's practices and an acrimonious parting between the Animal Protection Society and Schopler, the group's former vet. Commissioners Chairman Barry Jacobs said the squabble led elected officials to hold the work session sooner than they otherwise might have. "The public have such strong feelings, it's better to get them out on the table in some kind of organized way, rather than having a steady leakage of unhappiness and adversarial comment," Jacobs said. "My sense is that everyone involved is well- intentioned and trying to do the best they can for the animals." Jacobs and his colleagues plan to discuss Schopler's proposal first when they convene for the meeting. The vet is asking them to contribute to the creation of a facility he says would offer veterinary care to more than 2,000 wild animals in its first year and support training and research programs. Schopler has requested $100,000 from the county in the center's first year and further contributions that would rise slightly in the facility's second and third years. If the commissioners grant the request, they would provide about 36 percent of the estimated startup revenues of the wildlife center. The county's share would drop to about 21 percent by the third year if contributions from foundations and private donors roll in as Schopler expects. The county doesn't contribute any money to an Animal Protection Society wildlife sanctuary that Schopler managed on the group's behalf before his departure. A report from county administrators noted that technically it doesn't have to. "The county has no legal obligation to provide for the care or rehabilitation of wildlife," administrators said. Jacobs said that while commissioners intend to listen to Schopler's request, they face fiscal problems that dictate cau tion about new spending. "Obviously, we're in a constrained financial environment," Jacobs said, noting that officials are still coping with the trickle- down effects of the state's budget deficits. "We're not sure if we've met all our human services needs. I have no idea if we have the resources or the will to expand our animal welfare operation in that direction. It's a worthy idea, but whether it's a doable idea for Orange County is another question." Schopler also has asked the commissioners to help his proposed wildlife center find a permanent home. His proposal singles out the Seven Mile Creek preserve - a patch of land near Hillsborough the county bought years ago as a pros pective reservoir site - as one possibility. County involvement is justified because a wildlife center could help educate residents about the environment and help the Health Department spot cases of wildlife-borne diseases such as West Nile virus, Schopler's proposal says. The prospective review of the Animal Protection Society will follow Schopler's proposal on the agenda, but commissioners expect to spend much more of their time on it. They could end the meeting by giving County Manager John Link Jr. permission to hire a consultant to lead the effort. Link's office has singled out the American Humane Society and the Humane Society of America as two possibilities. A subcommittee of the county health board, however, has urged officials to convene focus groups in the northern and southern halves of the county first, to gauge public sentiment on what the goals of the shelter should be. County administrators say that if they get a green light soon from the commissioners, the evaluation could be done by June. The Animal Protection Society has managed the shelter since 1979 and never been subject to a full-blown, outside review. The society's directors say they would welcome a review and recently filed a letter with the commissioners that fiercely defended the shelter's practices. The letter repeated their claim that Schopler left after he and the Animal Protection Society couldn't reach an agreement about the scope of his job and the future of the society's wildlife sanctuary. Society directors used the letter to address complaints about the shelter's actions with a dog that appeared in The Chapel Hill Herald's "Pet of the Week" feature. Shelter managers euthanized the animal after it had been featured in the paper as available, when they decided it was too aggressive to be adopted. The move also came, society directors said, after neighbors of a woman who wanted to adopt it asked them to deny her request. The letter went on to defend the shelter's handling of a disease outbreak over the summer that killed 40 kittens and forced workers to euthanize 70 more. It noted that the shelter has since passed a surprise inspection by a vet from the state Department of Agriculture. Society directors concluded by saying they believe most of the complaints that have come the shelter's way in recent weeks "are a result of disgruntled former employees and their supporters." But Jacobs said commissioners want to use Monday's session to calm the troubled waters. "Some people are taking it personally, and some people are trying to make it personal," he said. "But that's not how you do public policy. It's always a mistake when people try to make public policy based on their personal prejudices. And it's hurtful besides. Life delivers enough blows without us having to deliver them to one another when we all have good intentions." ________________________________________________________________ An outside review would benefit APS Originally published in: Chapel Hill Herald Thursday, October 31, 2002 Edition: Final Page: 4 Emotions were high at this week's Orange County Commissioners work session. When the talk is of animals, the conversation always seems to be passionate. Around 30 people spoke at the standing-room-only session, and both accusations and plaudits were flung at the Animal Protection Society and the way it manages the local animal shelter. For some, the nonprofit APS has been guilty of a multitude of sins, including fiscal mismanagement, inaccurate record-keeping and poor disease and adoption control. For others, the APS is a solid organization, effectively fulfilling its mission in a caring and concerned manner. Much of the disagreement over the APS results from the furor surrounding the society's parting with veterinarian Bobby Schopler. Schopler, the director of the APS' wildlife rehabilitation center, was let go this summer after being unable to agree on a new contract with the society. Now, Schopler wants to open a new, independent wildlife center, and is looking for financial donations and for around $100,000 from the county to help get his idea off the ground. The county already financially supports the APS, which has managed the shelter on its behalf since 1979. In difficult economic times, when the contents of the cupboard are limited and the suitors are numerous, it is not surprising that many of those who criticized the APS before the commissioners were Schopler supporters. Their comments should be taken with that understanding. Yet they also should not be dismissed or discounted either. That's why it's a good idea for the commissioners to go ahead with ordering an outside review of the shelter. After instructing County Manager John Link to gather information, set a timetable and establish a cost estimate for the evaluation, the commissioners are expected to approve the review later in Novem ber. The review can answer definitively questions about the management of the shelter in an objective way. It can determine if APS' vision and Schopler's dream can co-exist. Perhaps, most importantly, it can soothe emotions rubbed raw and bring civility back to discussions of humanity's best friends. c Copyright by The Durham Herald Company. Original copyright 2002. Copyright renewed 2003. All rights reserved. All material on heraldsun.com is protected by U.S. and international copyright laws and may not be reproduced or redistributed in any medium except as provided in the site's Terms of Use. ________________________________________________________________ APS board changes bylaws on elections Members can offer nominations, but voting left to board Originally published in: Chapel Hill Herald Wednesday, November 06, 2002 Edition: Final Page: 1 BY ROB SHAPARD rshapard@heraldsun.com; 732-6397 CHAPEL HILL - The Animal Protection Society of Orange County has changed its bylaws to give its board of directors the final call on the makeup of that board. The APS expects to send out letters today to its members that describe the change, APS board President Pat Beyle said Tuesday. Before the change, which the board approved unanimously on Monday, members of the organization were able to vote on board members. APS members still will be allowed to nominate candidates for the board, but the board will vote on them, Beyle said. The change comes as several recent critics of the APS have pushed successfully to be nominated for the board. The board has 15 seats, with five of the seats up for re-election at the APS board's Dec. 9 meeting, Beyle said. Elliot Cramer is one of five people who put their names forward as nominees and who are unified in their desire to "reform" the APS, Cramer said Tuesday. Cramer named Margie Huggins, Bibb Latane, Kendall Page and Beverly Rockhill as the other four. Cramer conceded that he's been an official APS member only for a few weeks, although he said he has been a supporter of APS and a user of its services. Cramer said he and Judith Reitman, another of the vocal APS critics who have gotten the ear of the Orange County Commissioners in recent months, led the effort to get the group of five nominated. Reitman, who also joined the APS this year, has said that the goal of looking into APS should be to "clean house." Cramer said he was convinced the APS board made the bylaw change on Monday primarily to keep his group from gaining seats on it. "It's clear they're worried about us getting five nominees elected," he said. "They've been extremely obstructionist in letting us get our nominations in, and now they have decided to take nominations but not let the membership decide." Beyle denied that was the reason. A board committee she chairs has been looking at the board selection process since April and is calling for a change, she said. "We've known that we've had bylaws with loopholes for two years," she said. "Every time we've gone at a bylaw study, we have been stopped by other priorities. "We have talked about this and talked about it and talked about it," she said. "It has been an ongoing concern." Beyle said the concern is that with the number of APS members growing to more than 1,000, it makes for an "unwieldy" process to have all the members vote on the makeup of the board. She said the board acted this week mainly because the December election is approaching. "We put our bylaws in line with many nonprofits in North Carolina, which have an open nominating process but a vote by the board of directors," she said. There are 11 nominees for the board, including Cramer and the four others he mentioned. Board members serve three-year terms, Beyle said. Four of the current board members are running to keep their seats, and one is not seeking re-election, she said. The critics are raising such issues as the board's polices and the APS's management of the animal shelter in Chapel Hill. The county contracts with the APS to run the shelter, paying about $429,000 this fiscal year. The county commissioners may hire an outside agency to assess the operation of the shelter. ________________________________________________________________ APS a secret society now? Originally published in: Chapel Hill Herald Sunday, November 10, 2002 Edition: Final Page: 4 BY ELLIOT M. CRAMER Guest columnist The Chapel Hill Herald has reported the recent action of the Animal Protection Society of Orange County's taking voting rights away from the APS membership and giving them to the APS board. The timing of this undemocratic action is very interesting. It took place the day before national elections, one week before a regularly scheduled APS board meeting, the same day that five nominations by the membership were officially accepted, and 10 days after notice of annual elections was sent out to the membership. Members receiving this notice naturally expected to have the voting rights stated in the APS bylaws. Five of us, committed to reform and cooperation in the APS, did succeed in having our nominations accepted, but only after continued improper obstructions placed in our path by the APS officers and their attorney, Ronald Merritt. APS President Pat Beyle is quoted as saying that "with the number of APS members growing to more than 1,000, it makes for an unwieldy process to have all the members vote on the makeup of the board." What must she think of the "unwieldy" process that took place Tuesday when millions of voters went to the polls to elect their representatives? Does her husband, UNC professor and well-known political scientist Thad Beyle, believe that this is an "unwieldy" process? Ms. Beyle denies her intent was to prevent "outsiders" from being elected to the APS board. This statement is disingenuous. Prior to the board's Oct. 14 meeting, Ms. Beyle sent out the required seven days' notice of a proposed bylaws change, the change that they have enacted. This notice was read to me by a board member. The vote was to take place in the secret executive session that the board reserves for such actions. On learning of this, I spoke to Ms. Beyle, who initially asserted that only "minor" revisions were being considered. When I told her that I knew of the proposed bylaw change, she was flustered and eventually assured me that no bylaw changes would take place in that meeting. In fact, the board did go into executive session, though I was assured by the APS attorney that "there was no intention to discuss bylaw changes." I was later informed by a board member that such changes were discussed and would take place at a later time. This has now been accomplished at a special board meeting called for that purpose. I was not informed of this meeting despite my repeated requests for notice. Although many of us are shocked at the undemocratic actions of this little group which depends on the public and Orange County for its income, the real issue is the incompetence of its operation since the current executive director took charge in January. There have been numerous allegations of improper animal care as reported to the Orange County Commissioners, along with concerns of disease management practices at the shelter. These concerns were validated in a review by UNC officials. There is an almost complete staff turnover, along with the firing of the highly regarded director of wildlife, Robert Schopler. It was said in a meeting of the County Board of Commissioners that, after being informed by the N.C. Veterinary Board that APS "cannot legally own a veterinary practice facility and employ a veterinarian to provide services to the public," the director illegally allowed 71 surgeries to be performed between June 28 and July 25. APS brags about its wonderful adoption record, but its statistics cannot be believed. As I have discussed with Orange County officials, the reported numbers of animals in the shelter for each of the last three months are in error by about 100 animals, out of fewer than 600. I would not believe any statistics from the APS office. In addition, the Felicit, Latan, Wildlife Sanctuary is closed until March, and probably forever. APS is acting like a secret society, controlled by a small group of individuals, despite its public funding. I believe that the public and Orange County should hold it accountable. The writer is a Chatham County resident and retired UNC professor and statistician. ________________________________________________________________ Orange County to pay for APS assessment Humane Society of U.S. will be hired for study of shelter Originally published in: The Herald-Sun Wednesday, November 20, 2002 Edition: Final Page: C8 BY ROB SHAPARD rshapard@heraldsun.com; 732-6397 HILLSBOROUGH - Orange County will put about $21,000 into an assessment of the animal shelter in Chapel Hill and its operation by the nonprofit Animal Protection Society of Orange County. Responding to harsh criticism of the APS this summer and fall, the Orange County Commissioners unanimously agreed on Tuesday to hire the Washington, D.C.-based Humane Society of the United States to study the shelter, which is run by the APS under a contract with the county that pays $429,000 in the current fiscal year. County Manager John Link has told the commissioners they eventually must decide whether they want to continue hiring the APS to run the shelter, or go another route. The commissioners haven't publicly staked out their positions, but they've heard enough concerns to want a lot more information. The criticism of the APS has focused on the society's management of diseases among animals in the shelter, its adoption policies, record-keeping, openness of records and meeting policies of the APS board of directors. The critics have targeted APS director Laura Walters specifically, as well as the board. The $21,000 includes $18,500 for work that the HSUS will do over the next several months, as well as $2,500 for the local Dispute Settlement Center to conduct focus groups around the county, in which people would talk about their experiences with the animal shelter. The current timetable shows the HSUS starting to collect information next month, but a site visit to Chapel Hill wouldn't take place until March. The HSUS would submit its report next summer. The $18,500 figure doesn't include travel expenses for the HSUS to present its report in Orange County, but the commissioners said they felt that would be important, so the cost likely will go up by several hundred dollars. On Tuesday, Commissioner Margaret Brown asked Rosie Summers, Orange health director, to forward any information to the commis sioners on the salaries and benefits provided by the APS. Commissioners Chairman Barry Jacobs said he was concerned that the HSUS study might not be enough to deal with the current acrimony surrounding the issue. He said he wanted the commissioners to choose some of the people involved and set up a mediation, possibly through the Dispute Settlement Center - an idea seconded by other commissioners. "I would see that as an integral part of this process," Jacobs said. Judith Reitman and Elliot Cramer, two of the harshest critics of Walters and the APS, spoke Tuesday, with Cramer agreeing that the HSUS study might not solve everything. "I think the problems are much more than mere differences of opinion," he said. Cramer and Reitman both sharply questioned the numbers in monthly reports the APS sends to the county, regarding animals in the shelter. No one from the APS spoke Tuesday. Walters has said she welcomes the outside assessment. Tuesday's vote was 4-0. Commissioner Alice Gordon had a broken foot and missed the meeting. c Copyright by The Durham Herald Company. Original copyright 2002. Copyright renewed 2003. All rights reserved. All material on heraldsun.com is protected by U.S. and international copyright laws and may not be reproduced or redistributed in any medium except as provided in the site's Terms of Use. ________________________________________________________________ APS critic asked not to come onto shelter property Elliot Cramer accuses group of retaliation Originally published in: Chapel Hill Herald Thursday, February 13, 2003 Edition: Final Page: 1 BY GEOFFREY GRAYBEAL ggraybeal@heraldsun.com; 918-1033 CHAPEL HILL - A vocal critic of the Animal Protection Society of Orange County contends the group is unfairly singling him out for his campaign against the operators of the county animal shelter. Elliot Cramer, a retired UNC professor and APS member, received a warning not to come onto shelter property after he showed up for Monday's APS board meeting. Chapel Hill police responded to a trespassing call at 9:25 p.m. at 1081 Airport Road, Police Department spokeswoman Jane Cousins said. Cramer cooperated with officers and left the premises. The address is that of the Orange County Animal Shelter. According to police reports, APS staff members had warned Cramer to stay away from the facility. Cramer said he received a letter dated Jan. 14 from APS President Pat Beyle, Executive Director Laura Walters and Shelter Manager Nicole Carper. The letter said that on three occasions, Cramer had "accessed or attempted to access" areas "clearly marked as off limits to the public." Cramer called those accusations "garbage" and "absolute nonsense." He said he'd only entered a restricted area once, because a gate had been removed from its entrance and no sign restricting entry was visible. "You are warned not to come upon or attempt to access the premises of the Orange County Animal Shelter again or the Chapel Hill Police will be contacted and legal action will be taken against you," the letter said. Cramer said he thought it outrageous that he was barred from a meeting of the organization, given that he's a member of it. He added that the trespassing charges were "trumped up as part of a retaliatory campaign by APS to malign its critics." Cramer and a handful of others formed a group called "Citizens for APS Reform" that has been sharply critical of APS management and Walters in particular. The criticism of the APS has focused on the society's management of diseases among animals in the shelter, its adoption policies, record keeping, the openness of its records and the meeting policies of the APS board of directors. The complaints surfaced last summer after the APS parted ways with the former director of its wildlife center, veterinarian Bobby Schopler. Schopler has since asked the Orange County Commissioners to help finance the creation of a new wildlife center. Responding to the criticism, the county commissioners agreed in November to hire an independent group, the Humane Society of the United States, to study the shelter and its management. The county allotted about $21,000 to the effort. The assessment won't be done until the summer. The APS runs the animal shelter under a contract with the county that's paying the group $429,000 during the current fiscal year. In the past, County Manager John Link has told the commissioners they must eventually decide whether to continue hiring the APS to run the shelter, or go another route. Beyle, the APS president, could not be reached for comment Wed nesday. Cramer said that he and friends of his have been denied access to membership lists, financial information and meeting minutes, among other items. "We're going to have to bring suit against the APS to get access to all the stuff," Cramer said. "We're expecting to bring a lawsuit against APS. All this stuff is open and shut. They're just clearly violating the law." APS attorney Ronald Merritt declined to comment. ________________________________________________________________ Lawsuit filed against APS By Geoffrey Graybeal : The Herald-Sun ggraybeal@heraldsun.com Feb 20, 2003 : 7:16 pm ET CHAPEL HILL -- Two members of the Animal Protection Society of Orange County have filed a lawsuit against the organization that accuses it of illegal activities. Retired UNC professor Elliot Cramer and activist Judith Reitman say the APS has refused to disclose documents, stripped members of their voting rights and impeded members' attempts to nominate people to serve on the APS board. Raleigh attorney Steven D. Simpson filed the lawsuit on Cramer and Reitman's behalf on Thursday. It also listed a newly organized group called Piedmont Animal Welfare Society -- PAWS -- as a co-plaintiff. Cramer, a Chatham County resident, and Reitman, a Chapel Hill resident, are the principal founders of PAWS. The group is based in Chatham County and "seeks to represent the general public with respect to the improvement of the treatment of animals," the suit says. Interviewed on Thursday Cramer said legal action was the last resort in a long-simmering dispute with APS. "They've got a corrupt organization and the only way to get their attention, obviously, is to take legal action," Cramer said. APS board President Pat Beyle returned a phone call initially directed to APS Executive Director Laura Walters. Beyle said Walters was unavailable for comment, and declined to discuss the case herself. "I can't talk to you about it, because this is the first I've heard of it, so I don't want to make comments that are inappro priate," Beyle said. Simpson and APS attorney Ronald Merritt couldn't be reached for comment. The suit accuses Walters and the APS board of refusing to hand over board minutes, membership lists and financial records, and takes the board to task for a November decision to change the group's bylaws. The change gave the board the final call on decisions about the makeup of the board. Before the change -- which the board approved unanimously -- members of the organization were able to vote on board members. APS members are still allowed to nominate candidates for the board, but the board elects them. The change came after Cramer and several other critics of the APS pushed successfully to be nominated for the board. The board has 15 seats, and five were up for re-election. The suit asks a Superior Court judge to: -- Declare APS' actions unlawful. -- Order a new election of board directors that allows members to vote. -- Void recent amendments to the group's articles of incorpora tion and bylaws. -- Make the APS disclose information. -- Tell the APS to give members and the plaintiffs immediate access to all board meetings, including executive sessions, and all financial records. -- Direct APS officials to tape all future board meetings. The suit requests a jury trial and seeks monetary damages in excess of $10,000. Cramer, Reitman and several other people have been sharply critical of APS management, and of Walters in particular. The complaints surfaced last summer after the APS parted ways with the former director of its wildlife center, veterinarian Bobby Schopler. Schopler has since asked the Orange County Commissioners to help finance the creation of a new wildlife center. Responding to the criticism, the commissioners agreed in November to hire an independent group, the Humane Society of the United States, to study the shelter and its management. The assessment won't be complete until the summer. Cramer said he hopes the lawsuit induces change. "We would like to bring democracy back to the APS," he said. "We want a membership meeting. We want the members to know what's going on in this corrupt organization." Cramer added that he'd been considering litigation for a few months, but decided to go ahead after APS officials barred him from the Orange County animal shelter. "They just have gone too far," Cramer said.