BB says:
August 6, 2014 at 4:06 pm

Ms. Klein, it is hard to believe that the Humane Society is continuing with self-serving propaganda. You say that the HSS are in financial stress but the HSS has $1 million in reserve and choose to utilize 40% of its income to salaries. (How can a non-profit animal rescue organization be able to have the monies to expend over $430,000 on salaries per annum and then state they are in financial stress? One is not in animal rescue to get rich, so if anyone at the HSS is only at the HSS to earn up to $85K a year, than they are not at the HSS for the right reasons).
You are still complaining that the City only gave the HSS $47,500 and your explanation really does not cut it. This is not a grant, this is not for the HSS to use toward its running costs, this is a service contract for the HSS to take in the 40 dogs that the City bring to you and the costs the HSS expend on that (which at the moment is double than any other humane society), plus additional monies. You decided to say yes to do this service for the City, the Community and to the dogs, so if you are going to continue to harp on the fact that you only got $150,000 over 3 years and criticize the City then you should have not accepted it and let another shelter in the area do this service that would be thrilled with $47,500 for the first year with increases in year 2 and year 3. You should be happy to do this service and the fact that you are still complaining implies that you only are interested in the amount of the money of the contract and not about the 40 dogs that need to receive shelter and help. This certainly is not putting the animals first especially since, I reiterate, you have enough money to meet $430,000 in payroll so the HSS in fact does have the money (in addition to the $47,500 p.a.) to help these dogs but just chooses to put the money in their pockets instead.
As the City Council stated at the Council Meeting, the HSS cannot expect the City Council to give you more money simply because you cannot manage your own finances with regard to your income and expenditure. The Humane Society lost its credibility when a statement was released that was filled with blatant lies and inaccuracies so there is no reason I can think of why I should believe anything the HSS says. It is astounding that the person who did this – whether it was you Ms. Klein or another Director – had no compunction in doing so – with the aim of manipulating the community by pulling on their heartstrings and urging them to tell the City Council to give you $95,000 – is still working at the HSS. (The City was bombarded with emails as a consequence of your erroneous facts in your statement and many people were irate when they discovered the truth. Also many people on Facebook were aware that you removed comments that stated the truth). This indicates that the HSS approve of this behavior and the decision to do so shows a lack of respect to the dogs, community – who they rely on for donations – and the City! The City Council rightly stated that this was a very bad decision made by the HSS, as do lots of other people, and they “threw the City under the bus”. The Council were wondering if the HSS were “man enough” to apologize to the City and the community and the fact the HSS has not issued an apology speaks volumes!
A lot of things about the HSS have been exposed Ms. Klein and these certainly are not myths but facts. The HSS can only blame themselves for their own mismanagement and for the reason why people have misgivings on the HSS due to these facts, and who do not want to support a non-profit that feels it is justifiable to use 40% of income for salaries and who charge $125 for fund raising tickets when only $60 goes to the animals! I am an animal lover and, I along with many other people, are giving the animals a voice by saying that in their best interests, in-house changes need to be made and due to the above decision by the HSS to issue that statement (and for other things that they HSS does (or does not do) that have come to light), many of us feel strongly that the current Executive Director, yourself and the other Directors and the Board need to resign. To improve things for the animals, procedures, policies, reputation and credibility, the HSS needs to have people run it who care about the animals and make them their number 1 priority as it is apparent that the existing group make it more about the money, their egos, and less about the animals. People are even suggesting that the current management are running the HSS into the ground, along with its credibility and reputation, and are losing support left, right and center whether it be from people or local businesses, as they would rather support non-profit organizations who work hard for no salary to do the utmost to save animals lives and find them homes.

It was wrong for the HSS to send out the misleading e-blast. No doubt about that. And I hope for the sake of all the animals the wound has been bandaged and will heal without too much damage. However, for the City to continue pandering to uptown (Chamber, Tourism, Main Street) under so many different funding flags is worse.

There was absolutely no rational justification or detailed substantiation for the $7,000 increase to Main Street for the next three years. But then with Councilwoman Barbara Litrell and Vice Mayor Mark DiNunzio on the “deciding” committee, who would have expected otherwise? Add to the mix Mayor Candidate Sandy Moriarty, a solid supporter and frequent public speaker on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce, head honcho for the Wine Festival, and also a member of the “committee,” who would have expected anything else?

Blatantly biased individuals should have no place as elected officials on a City Council. They would better serve in closed doors on their favorite committees, manipulating city funds. But, silly me, they already are doing that.

Just wait. Should Home Rule miraculously be voted down, with the likes of DiNunzio, Williamson, and Moriarty (should she become Mayor) on the City Council, rest assured it will NOT be funding to their “pet” give-away special interests that will be cut. B. Litrell, of course, being off Council can devote all of her time working for the Chamber. (maybe as a paid employee if she can’t get a job selling time shares)

For the record, John Martinez was the only one who challenged the increased funding to Main Street and also the only one of a council of seven who voted against renewal of the service contracts based on unknown revenue sustainability for the next three years.

And then you have Sandy Moriarty. Who is she besides a candidate for mayor? Well, constantly present at council meetings that one is. And she spoke on behalf of the increase in funding to the Chamber. And of course let’s not forget her involvement with the Wine Festival yet another in the growing line-up for “entitlements.” Indeed a very busy woman among the controlling movers and shakers who are always ready and available to give away public money to the U-NO-WHO! Ain’t no grass growin’ under that girl’s feet and, of course, no conflict of interest in the self-proclaimed elitists who are controlling Sedona’s purse strings.

Agreeing w/HSS volunteer, Humane Society may as well take the money if for no other reason than to prevent it going to the overly greedy who will be waiting in the wings if the offer is declined.

Remember it’s the displaced animals that matter. Isn’t it too bad Sedona doesn’t have a place to incarcerate displaced people with nothing better to do than hang out at City Hall?

And $75,000 for Art in Public Places? Why oh why wouldn’t artists be clamoring for the privilege of having their “donations” selected for prominent places? Wasn’t that the case of the Susan Kliewer statue of Sedona Schnebly at the library?

The list of trivial pork and perks is endless. The outrageous amount given to the Film Festival is shameful. City loses bed tax and sales tax due to the amount of “freebies” given during that event. Once again our parking lots and roads are clogged with traffic without benefit of accountability: profit or loss? Ask that question when in a week or so the matter of new sources of revenue is again on the table. Rest assured this council will push that through if possible prior to the departure of four of them in November.

Then the “double dippers” have created quite a scam. Individually and collectively they manage to stack the deck. City Council has allowed the control of Sedona to fall into the hands of a select few who will continue to bludgeon the rest of us as long as we allow it. ENOUGH!

What? Isn’t this the case with the so-called ‘Sedona’ Chamber of Commerce, already approved by Council to receive a $1,148,500 subsidy this fiscal year? Many municipalities with populations as small as Sedona’s don’t financially support their local Chamber, nor do they have a long list of non-profits receiving taxpayer hand-outs.

I’m in favor of the solution that the City “cease and desist funding to ALL non-profits.”