Community Forum Regarding 298 Walton Avenue (formerly the JAC building)

Don't be sore at SO if Maplewood entered into a deal that is not advantagous to it.

I'm not sore at all, let alone at SO (though frustrated maybe at the time it took to get to this point, but that's water under the bridge now that Sheena is actively taking the lead). I'd expect Maplewood to proceed no differently than SO in that position.

ctrzaska said:
... I'll defer to Sheena and others on matters of govt process, but ...

ctrzaska said:

SO will arrive at a decision as to what to do with the place, having discussed it with the public beforehand (as now), then ostensibly take it to Maplewood. Whether they vote on a resolution before or after that step I do not know. Presumably they are talking with representatives of Maplewood (Joe M., Bob Roe, etc). I do not believe they can be assured of Maplewood's buy-in prior to any vote, or even discuss it with a majority of the TC, though as I said I'll defer to the likes of Sheena or anyone more knowledgable. Mapkewood would of course have their own resolution and vote.

The Oracle of MOL

Yup.

ctrzaska said:
Yup.

Did anyone actually go the meeting and can report back on what was discussed??

tom said:
Dear Ruth,
It's a shame you burned that million dollars. But it's not our problem.

Did she now? Do you have the financials backing up your assertion?

Often, people get over their heads. At least Ruth did something. She saved many animals.

Morganna said:

ctrzaska said:
That's my understanding.

OK so does that give Maplewood a fair 50% vote?

It gives Maplewood a say on the matter, a voice that they have not utilized yet. They keep saying that South Orange has to decide, but Maplewood has half ownership of the building and they have a need for animal control which is not currently being addressed. Maplewood has a voice which they choose not to use.

SO has been discussing this issue forever with Maplewood and with SO animal advocates. The docs I got from OPRA showed that SO has been discussing the JAC and animal control since at least March of 2014, the time when Maplewood decided to contract AHS/Nwk..

Sheena has been having discussions with a private group of SO Animal Advocates which was urging the Village to take action since January 2015, why do they need to continue these discussions? they have all the facts, they've listened to everyone.

In my view what is needed is for a group of SO and Maplewood residents who are concerned about the issue to organize and to give them the support to make a decision to support animals.

duplicate post

She ran it into the ground. And in the process she even further alienated the local community.

Think of what she could have done instead. She could have listened to volunteers. She could have behaved responsibly. She could have reached out to the community and addressed concerns. She could have turned away animals from out-of-state. She could have accepted animals from town residents.

She could have built something durable. But she didn't. She only built resistance.

Thanks to everyone who came out last night.

I think these forums are very important. I call them "community conversations". I have meetings all the time with basically anyone who wants to chat but when making critical decisions, all the stakeholders really need to be in the same room so they can listen to one another.

I learned a lot last night and some of the concerns that were raised the Village is actively following up on. I'll have this under my report on Monday. No recommendations will be made at that time. We still have a lot more research to do.

But again, I really thank everyone who took the time to sit in a hot room for a couple hours and share their opinions. This was the first meeting that brought together the various interests and there will likely be another one once we've done our due diligence as it pertains to the legal issues and fully understanding our relationship as it relates to Maplewood. I don't have an answer to that question right now.

tom said:
She ran it into the ground. And in the process she even further alienated the local community.
Think of what she could have done instead. She could have listened to volunteers. She could have behaved responsibly. She could have reached out to the community and addressed concerns. She could have turned away animals from out-of-state. She could have accepted animals from town residents.
She could have built something durable. But she didn't. She only built resistance.

And then, as you pointed out in the other thread, her organization seems to have stripped the place bare in the process of closing down. So JAC left the town with bare space, perhaps making it easier to have a broad discussion of best use for that site (uses that might benefit both communities?), as well as best animal control options.

In spite of my respect to all of the animal activists here (and in spite of concern about the animals), after the JAC experience I would currently have a hard time handing over public land or funds to any organization that does not have a proven track record in running an actual shelter, whatever their experience with rescue or fostering.

I would like to see our towns operate an animal shelter. However, largely based on what I've learned about the operation of the JAC, my strong preference for any shelter funded by our two towns would include the following parameters:

• The shelter is to be used as a Temporary holding facility for animals brought in by the towns' ACOs or local citizens
• Adoptions: if strays are not claimed within a defined time period, they could be adopted. Same with feral kittens, etc. A reasonable fee schedule should be charged.
• No importation of "rescue" animals from other states for adoption and as a funding source
• While a no-kill shelter sounds like a humane idea, we've learned that it can turn into another, even more evil, form of torture for animals that cannot be adopted. If some animals are not (or cannot be) adopted after a reasonable, defined time period, the shelter (and towns) should have arrangements that the animals are removed and shifted to another facility.

Sheena said:
Thanks to everyone who came out last night.
I think these forums are very important. I call them "community conversations". I have meetings all the time with basically anyone who wants to chat but when making critical decisions, all the stakeholders really need to be in the same room so they can listen to one another.
I learned a lot last night and some of the concerns that were raised the Village is actively following up on. I'll have this under my report on Monday. No recommendations will be made at that time. We still have a lot more research to do.
But again, I really thank everyone who took the time to sit in a hot room for a couple hours and share their opinions. This was the first meeting that brought together the various interests and there will likely be another one once we've done our due diligence as it pertains to the legal issues and fully understanding our relationship as it relates to Maplewood. I don't have an answer to that question right now.

I don't believe for one minute that the animal advocates understood that your private chats would be invalid, because all the stakeholders needed to be in the same room listening to each other. In my discussions with the SO advocates I heard their fear that if they weren't "nice", they might not get the shelter. But what it looks like to me, what it looked like to me back then, was that it was a ploy to simply silence them before the election. It worked. Congrats, Sheena, you got elected, and you gave nothing to those folks who placated you.

Pretty strong words Copihue. You appear to had already made up your mind before the election that it was all a "ploy", and now "people got nothing".

Really?

Instead of faulting Sheena for trying a much more inclusive approach (which I find a truly refreshing change), why don't you give the process a chance?

Setting aside Sheena's confirmation that they still need to finish due diligence on the as-yet-unfinalized process and dealings with Maplewood for now (I could have sworn I heard someone mention that upthread)...

So you and others thought that by having some discussions with a BOT member kind enough to meet with you in private that it somehow (in the face of formal, municipal process no less) entitled you to preferential treatment and an assurance of your preferred solution without SO considering any other options? Really? Wow.

(And some news: Sheena won by a landslide.)

My pals at Delphi say hello.

Copihue said:

I don't believe for one minute that the animal advocates understood that your private chats would be invalid, because all the stakeholders needed to be in the same room listening to each other. In my discussions with the SO advocates I heard their fear that if they weren't "nice", they might not get the shelter. But what it looks like to me, what it looked like to me back then, was that it was a ploy to simply silence them before the election. It worked. Congrats, Sheena, you got elected, and you gave nothing to those folks who placated you.

Seriously? Our Village president tries to get input from ALL of the Village and you have a nasty retort such as above? No good deed goes unpunished.

BTW, didn't you move to another continent? maybe try to fix some problems there and see how easy that is.

Copihue said:

Sheena said:
Thanks to everyone who came out last night.
I think these forums are very important. I call them "community conversations". I have meetings all the time with basically anyone who wants to chat but when making critical decisions, all the stakeholders really need to be in the same room so they can listen to one another.
I learned a lot last night and some of the concerns that were raised the Village is actively following up on. I'll have this under my report on Monday. No recommendations will be made at that time. We still have a lot more research to do.
But again, I really thank everyone who took the time to sit in a hot room for a couple hours and share their opinions. This was the first meeting that brought together the various interests and there will likely be another one once we've done our due diligence as it pertains to the legal issues and fully understanding our relationship as it relates to Maplewood. I don't have an answer to that question right now.

I don't believe for one minute that the animal advocates understood that your private chats would be invalid, because all the stakeholders needed to be in the same room listening to each other. In my discussions with the SO advocates I heard their fear that if they weren't "nice", they might not get the shelter. But what it looks like to me, what it looked like to me back then, was that it was a ploy to simply silence them before the election. It worked. Congrats, Sheena, you got elected, and you gave nothing to those folks who placated you.

Copihue - To be clear, I met some of our animal advocates to discuss TNR a couple months ago (1 intro meeting with 2 people and 1 meeting with 2 others to go over a presentation from a subject matter expert) . I knew nothing about the program and someone reached out to me to discuss. I had to do a lot of research and evaluate what other towns were doing. From then, I helped setup a presentation in front of the BOT, BOH and for the community to see and understand what it was. I'm just now better understanding the situation with 298 Walton - listening to various stakeholders, looking at data, and reaching out to other municipalities and shelters. I don't expect people to be nice to me (although I certainly appreciate people who can be respectful of one another). And a ploy to silence? Silence what exactly? I literally ran my first meeting as VP 10 days ago and turned around two pretty big public forums since that point in time on two important issues because I believe in a strong public process - that's just my style. I hope you'll continue participating in this process. I can tell you care deeply about this topic.

Yes, I am in another continent, but even here it makes my blood boil to read about the inaction in relationship with this issue. The talk, talk, talk and promise, promise, promise that doesn't go any further than that.

Last year I was warned that this would happen by several individuals, but I was naïve, and I decided to try to care. They were right.

To the Sheena apologists, let me say that Sheena is not a newbie with the Village Trustees; she's been there for years, and she was aware of the problem with animal control. What came of the meeting yesterday? nothing. Not even a recommendation, just a promise of more study.

I was not at any of the South Orange intimate chats, but knowing who was there, I have a very difficult time believing that there was never any discussion or lobbying about the JAC.

This meeting sounds like more of the same ol'. same ol', same ol'.

Agreed ...all the facts have been known for months if not years ...by both the SO and Maplewood governing bodies and administrations .

The public outrage has been felt and heard in forums and town Hall meetings .The disgrace of the shelter has been compounded by the poor decisions already made by both towns .. People who love animals , residents who have heard of the treatment at the shelter, the animals held in homes under horrid conditions ....the legal matters are well known as well.

Action needs to be taken ..enough study and information has been reviewed ..courage and decisiveness need to be in play by both towns ...is the courage there

icdart said:
Agreed ...all the facts have been known for months if not years ...by both the SO and Maplewood governing bodies and administrations .
The public outrage has been felt and heard in forums and town Hall meetings .The disgrace of the shelter has been compounded by the poor decisions already made by both towns .. People who love animals , residents who have heard of the treatment at the shelter, the animals held in homes under horrid conditions ....the legal matters are well known as well.
Action needs to be taken ..enough study and information has been reviewed ..courage and decisiveness need to be in play by both towns ...is the courage there

Yes the courage is here. A few of us may have taken different roads, and traveled at different speeds, and disagreed along the way, but we have all pretty much arrived at the same destination. We want a shelter for South Orange and Maplewood, shared services for SOMa, no more waiting. The building is there, let's get it going.

I still offer to run the cat rooms, pay for their vetting, raise my own funds and supply my own insurance. Just open the door and I will paint murals, buy cages and take whatever cats animal control brings me. I offered it over a year ago and I offer it here on MOL. I VOLUNTARILY ran those cat rooms many years ago. I'm a 501C3 with a good track record of helping the town with our animal problems. Just throw me the keys and turn on the lights! OPEN FOR ADOPTIONS!

Report on the discussion of the meeting can be found here https://maplewood.worldwebs.com/forums/discussion/id/117100-Animal-Shelter-for-SOMa-why-no-progress-?page=4#comment-3020120

Copihue, you're totally out of line.

For clarification. When people on this thread say that South Orange, Maplewood or both should run the shelter, do you mean add a budget line item to fund running a municipal shelter (with paid municipal employees) versus a shelter run as a non-for-profit?

And when people offer to volunteer to run the shelter, what is your sense of the operating budget required to run a shelter in a way that is improvement over the JAC? A budget that covers vet care, liability insurance (required to be in that building), gas & electric and any other costs incurred that would be required by the state to run an animal shelter?

This is not a critique. Just questions to better understand the different options.

meandtheboys said:
Copihue, you're totally out of line.

meandtheboys said:
Copihue, you're totally out of line.

I'll take things that are groosly understated for $1000 Alex.

onadare said:
For clarification. When people on this thread say that South Orange, Maplewood or both should run the shelter, do you mean add a budget line item to fund running a municipal shelter (with paid municipal employees) versus a shelter run as a non-for-profit?
And when people offer to volunteer to run the shelter, what is your sense of the operating budget required to run a shelter in a way that is improvement over the JAC? A budget that covers vet care, liability insurance (required to be in that building), gas & electric and any other costs incurred that would be required by the state to run an animal shelter?
This is not a critique. Just questions to better understand the different options.

Well my offer as it stood last year was to simply run the 2 cat rooms, I'm having problems with my scanner or I would highlight or add a photo with "picture your next cat here!" I don't have handy the square footage, but those who have been in the shelter know that it is a small part of the shelter. I made arrangements to run things out of those rooms during the final days of the JAC (which helped get homes for the final 47) and had spent 6 months doing something similar years before.

During the negotiations last year I offered it as a compromise to both the town and the JAC. Take that part off their hands and the town would have a new person to deal with regarding the cats.

I offer it in a similar way, kind of "cat boutique" or a "cat cafe" within a building with a great deal of options for community use in all of the other rooms.

If the town wants to have dogs, there are groups who could use that as their venue!

A room could be for dog training or bike rental, pet supplies, or a doggie hotel. Many items sold for pets, could be made by local artists. An outdoor café with lemonade for children and double espresso for tired Moms and Dads.

I'll try to upload the floor plan.

Think a hybrid, think a compromise, think a win for everyone!

Let's see if I can put this up...... Sorry I'll try to rotate but it is the 2 small rooms, in the back center! Is that too much to ask?

OK let's see....there the 2 rooms in the back center.

GGartrell said:

meandtheboys said:
Copihue, you're totally out of line.

I'll take things that are groosly understated for $1000 Alex.

LOL.

Morganna, I understand that the space is available, but I am asking how will this all get paid for? Veterinary care of animals? Food? Full-time care? Maintaining requirements that will allow compliance with state and local health code? Electric? Water? Liability insurance? Running an operation open to the communities at scale (and allowing intake) requires some level of stable, sustainable cash. I want to understand what that operating amount is and where it is coming from. That would give some sense of where this fits in with township budgets or if the proposed model will be to rely on donations.

Also, the cat room seems to be small. Where will quarantine for intake be located?

If this is no-kill, vet care (particularly for dogs) could get expensive if sick/injured animals are taken in. Just a thought.

You are doing amazing work, by the way. Have you reached out to successful local groups (St. Hubert's or Animal Haven) for any advice or recommendations?