A  HISTORY OF NEW YORK CITY’S ANIMAL SHELTER SYSTEM

Contents:
















































A review of the past 115+ plus years of New York City’s animal shelter system has one constant:
Whether in boom times or bust, New York City does as little as possible---and generally far less---to
fund, support, and care for its homeless and abandoned animals.  The Mayor’s designee to oversee
the homeless pet population ---the Department of Health (DOH)---defies both City laws and a court
ruling requiring improvement in the care of our City’s homeless companion animals.  Because of the
DOH’s stonewalling, each year thousands of adoptable animals are euthanized, their bodies stored
in freezers and then hauled away in the middle of the night to be cremated on Staten Island.  The
DOH withholds the truth about the misery and death it forces upon the City’s homeless dogs and
cats.  

The Bronx and Queens remain without full-service animal shelters.  The shelters in Manhattan and
Brooklyn are disgraceful, infection-ridden buildings.  The DOH continues to cynically underfund
animal care services, first undertaken by the ASPCA, and then by “Animal Care and Control” (AC&C),
the entity that Mayor Giuliani’s office created in 1994.

To understand the issues and parties involved, here’s an overview of how the City’s homeless pets
have fared over the years.






In the beginning, there is the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA),
founded by Henry Bergh to protect carriage and work horses.  Thirty years later, the ASPCA agrees to
the City’s entreaties to take charge of the care and control of the City’s dogs and cats.  To do this, a
special law is passed in Albany, allowing mayors of major cities the power to designate an agency to
deal with “lost, strayed or homeless animals.”   The ASPCA maintains its own animal shelters,
purchases animal ambulances and so-called dog-catcher trucks, and hires Humane Law
Enforcement officers (state police officers who are granted arrest powers).  All of this is a vast
improvement over how stray dogs had been handled pre-1894: They were rounded up, jammed into
cages, and lowered into the East River to drown.

In 1972, the actress/animal activist Gretchen Wyler is the first woman appointed to serve on the Board
of Directors of the ASPCA.  Wyler attracts a group of dedicated volunteers to help at the ASPCA
shelters.  In 1976, she sues the ASPCA for financial irregularities and cruelty to animals. Having seen
first-hand the dysfunction and callousness at the ASPCA shelters and by its Board of Directors, she
encourages other volunteers to protest.  Ultimately, the ASPCA promises to do better and settles
privately with Wyler.  Wyler moves to California to California to continue her activism there.

Shamed by the Wyler lawsuit, in 1976, for the first time, the ASPCA seeks reimbursement from the
City for its animal care and control services.  The Mayor assigns the City's Department of Health
(DOH) to administer the contract and set the ASPCA’s annual budget.  The contract requires the
ASPCA to seize stray animals, operate shelter facilities, accept owner-surrendered animals, and
provide euthanasia as necessary.  The contract also sets the template for years of inadequate
funding and drastic budget reductions imposed by the DOH.  Despite the mutual benefits the ASPCA
and the City initially derived from these contracts, the ASPCA's relationship with City government
quickly becomes contentious.








In the early 1980's, tension is fueled by the ASPCA's allegations that the City refused to pay the actual
cost of providing animal care and control services. The DOH promises to do better, and in 1989 even
offers to help the ASPCA  float bonds to build a state of the art Manhattan shelter for the ASPCA and to
create a veterinary unit in the Bronx and a shelter in Queens. The City’s homeless pets will never see
those promised facilities.










The ASPCA purchases an old factory on East 110th Street, in East Harlem, to serve as its “new”
Manhattan shelter. From the start, the Manhattan shelter suffers from a multitude of well-documented
deficiencies – all of which continue to date. The ASPCA’s Brooklyn shelter on Linden Boulevard is no
better.  It is also a converted factory, located blocks from the last stop on a subway line, and in the
highest homicide-per-capita neighborhood of the City. Needless to say, relatively few rescuers,
volunteers, and public adopters venture out to the Brooklyn shelter.

In March 1993, the ASPCA announces that  it will not renew its contract with the DOH, and will cease
its animal care and control activities on December 31, 1994. This decision follows on the heels of
critical internal reports about shelter conditions.   Also, volunteers and internal staff complain mightily
about the disgraceful conditions at the ASPCA shelters and the high euthanasia rates.

In 1995, the ASPCA formally resigns  from animal care and control services, explaining that killing
stray dogs and cats has obscured its mission – and its image. The ASPCA also claimed that the $4.5
million a year the city was paying them was not enough, and that they were losing almost $1 million
per year on the contract.  No longer burdened with the stigma of being a high-kill shelter, the ASPCA
goes on to be one of the highest-grossing humane societies  in the United States, taking in millions
of dollars every year.   

In 1993 the DOH commissions a study to report the state of the shelter system and what would be
needed for an effective transition. The report is completed in February 1994. The report emphasizes
the need for senior management with extensive sheltering experience as well as the need for better
facilities and equipment (confirming the poor state of the facilities). Ignoring the study’s
recommendations, Mayor Giuliani’s office creates the perfect prototype to guarantee failure. The
Mayor’s office creates a 501(c)3 entity, which it names the “Center for Animal Care and Control”
(CACC, later shortened to AC&C), to assume responsibility for the City’s homeless pet population.  
While the AC&C is technically a stand-alone non-profit corporation, the DOH controls every aspect of
the AC&C’s existence: drafting its by-laws, selecting its Executive Directors and Directors, setting its
budget, and imposing various onerous requirements. The AC&C is a de facto extension of the DOH---
with the DOH simultaneously claiming the AC&C to be an independent entity which can operate and
negotiate effectively with the City.

The mayor’s press release announcing  the creation of the AC&C states that the budget will be $4.5
million. This is the same amount that the ASPCA received and claimed was inadequate. The DOH
selects Martin Kurtz, from the DOH’s veterinary division, as the first AC&C Executive Director.  Kurtz
has had no prior shelter management experience, setting the pattern of Executive Directors for years
to come.  For the first several years, the Commissioner of Sanitation heads the AC&C board, a
crudely stark admission that the City views homeless animals as garbage.   








In October, reeling from recent press release critical of its management, AC&C officials expel
whistleblowers.   Click here to read the official letters of an expelled volunteer.  

The SRAC complains to the City’s Conflicts of Interest Board about the multiple conflicts arising from
the DOH’s control of the AC&C and the selection of Directors and Executive Directors.  The SRAC’s
objections are ignored.  








In February, the SRAC files a lawsuit seeking to declare the AC&C subject to Freedom of Information
laws and demanding that it open its Board of Directors meetings to the public (A decision is rendered
in January 1999, in which the SRAC’s requests for various internal records are granted. As discussed
later, the DOH voluntarily opens up board meetings.)

After two years of mounting criticism, Kurtz resigns as AC&C Executive Director. Four months later,
Marilyn Haggerty-Blohm,  a Giuliani aide with no prior shelter management experience (but with
experience in solid waste disposal), is appointed to serve as Acting Executive Director.  After months
of pressure, the City Council's Contracts Committee, headed by Kathryn E. Freed, begins a formal
investigation of the AC&C.  Freed's investigators complain they are being slowed by uncooperative
DOH officials delaying the production of documents.

In June, the City Council’s Contracts Committee (headed by Kathryn E. Freed) issues a report titled
Dying for Homes: Animal Care and Control in New York City.  The report is a powerful indictment of
the DOH’s stewardship of the AC&C.  It is accompanied by written statements by the two independent
AC&C directors who condemn the state of the AC&C and the DOH’s oversight and inadequate
funding.  

The two directors are summarily dismissed. Since then, the DOH and the Mayor’s Office carefully
screen directors for their loyalty to the Mayor and the DOH; dissent will not be tolerated.)  

The SRAC leads a ballot initiative to amend the City Council Charter to create a Department of Animal
Affairs and to remove the DOH (and, by extension, the Mayor) from control of the AC&C. The City Clerk
rejects the petition, and in September, the SRAC sues  to have its ballot initiative placed on the
November 1997 election ballot.

In September, the judge dismisses the SARC’s petition, relying on an 1894 New York State statute
giving the Mayor of New York City sole authority to designate animal protection duties.  The court rules
that the proposed ballot initiative infringes on the Mayor's authority. In short, only a change in
legislation in Albany can remove the City’s homeless animals from the callously indifferent treatment
accorded them by a succession of mayors and by the DOH.  While responsible for the health of City
residents, the DOH has always viewed the care and health of animals as an ancillary concern,
relevant only if an animal might pose a health or safety hazard to humans.  (That’s why the DOH must
be removed from control over animal care and control services.)








The DOH retains the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) to conduct an investigation and
publish a report on the AC&C.  The SRAC files a detailed challenge to the HSUS methodology and
conclusions.  While the HSUS report is somewhat critical of the AC&C, it is far too deferential to the
DOH, and the SRAC submits a point-by-point rebuttal.  But the SRAC does agree with the HSUS’s
observation that the AC&C/DOH relationship is fraught with conflicts of interest.

In October, New York Magazine publishes an investigative piece by  Elizabeth Hess entitled  Gimme
Shelter.  The article is highly critical of the conditions at the AC&C and the City's and DOH's callous
indifference.









The Gimme Shelter article prompts the City’s Comptroller, Alan Hevesi, to commence his own
office’s audit of the AC&C.  It is based on interviews with former employees and rescue workers
conducted during the period 1999-2001. (The report is published in 2002 by Hevesi’s successor,
William Thompson, Jr.)

In January, a judge grants the SRAC’s request to be given access to AC&C internal records and  that
the AC&C’s Board meeting be open to the public.  (Since that decision, the AC&C Board opens its
meetings to the public for the first hour, and then adjourns to closed session.)








In April, Councilwoman Kathryn Freed successfully secures passage of a city law requiring full
service animal shelters be established in all five boroughs.  (The Animal Shelters and Sterilization
Act, Local Law 26, 17-801 – 1-808 to Title 17 of the New York City Administrative Code.) Monies are
set aside to build full-service animal shelters in two of the City’s most populous and needy boroughs:
the Bronx and Queens, which do not have shelters of their own.  The DOH is required to enforce the
legislation and to report annually to the City Council on its progress.  








In June, the new City Comptroller, William C. Thompson Jr., releases an 88-page audit, commenced
during Hevesi’s term, that concludes that the AC&C  "does not provide humane conditions for all of
the animals in its shelters and has not made aggressive efforts to increase adoptions of homeless
animals."  The report finds that animals are subjected to abuse and neglect and that employees who
mistreat animals are rarely dismissed. The report also notes that the AC&C is notoriously hostile to
volunteers.

Over the summer, the entire AC&C Board of Directors is replaced. Dr. Thomas Frieden, the DOH
Commissioner, is elected chairman of the AC&C board and remains in that position until he leaves
the DOH in 2009.

Mayor Bloomberg  cites financial difficulties following 9/11 as the basis for requesting an extension of
the law requiring shelters in the Bronx and Queens.   In July, Christine Quinn, head of the City  
Council’s Health Committee, brokers a deal with the Mayor’s Office, with the City Council amending
the statute The Animal Shelters and Sterilization Act, giving the DOH an extension of time.  
Specifically, the DOH is given until 2004 to submit detailed plans for full-service shelters in the Bronx
and in Queens, and until 2006 to have the shelters up and running.

In September, Mayor Bloomberg announces budget cuts and slashes the AC&C shelter hours by
50%.

In October, The AC&C Board fires Executive Director Haggerty-Blohm a week after she says that
some animals have died because of the budget cuts.  However, the rescue community applauds her
departure.  Click here to view a video of SRAC co-founder Gary Kaskel.

Julian Prager, General Counsel to the AC&C, is appointed Interim Executive Director.  He is a
professional bulldog breeder.  (Later, he is quietly promoted to Executive Director .)  His 9-month
tenure at the AC&C is marked by continuing criticism and deterioration of shelter services and
conditions.  

In October Jane Hoffman, an attorney and founding member of the NYC Bar Association’s “Animals
and the Law” Committee, approaches Mayor Bloomberg with a proposal: she will create a network of
rescuers to pull from the AC&C, and apply for a substantial grant from “Maddie’s Fund” which
donates millions of dollars to organizations that work to achieve “no kill” communities.   Hoffman
secures Mayor Bloomberg’s blessing and names the organization “The Mayor’s Alliance,” even
though all she asks (and receives) from the City is use of public parks for adoptions events, and
reserved parking spaces in front of AC&C shelter buildings.  Hoffman signs a Memorandum of
Understanding with the City that New York will become a “no kill” city by the year 2008 (which the
Alliance subsequently extends to 2015).  

On behalf of the AC&C, now Executive Director Prager signs a Memorandum of Understanding
allowing the Mayor's Alliance to help pull the AC&C out of the hole the DOH has dug for the AC&C.. In
later years, Prager pads his resume to suggest that he was in large part responsible for the Mayor’s
Alliance’s creation and its success in increasing the number of rescued animals.   

The Mayor’s Alliance opens “New Hope” offices in each of the AC&C’s three shelters. New Hope staff
members coordinate with rescuers who pull animals from the AC&C.

The Maddie’s Fund, a family foundation funded by Dave Duffield and his wife Cheryl, is named after
the family’s beloved miniature Schnauzer who passed away in 1997.  Maddie’s Fund’s purpose is to
help create a “no-kill” nation where all healthy and treatable shelter dogs and cats are guaranteed a
loving home.









The DOH hires Ed Boks to be the next AC&C Executive Director.  Boks initially agrees to a six-month
term, and to work only part-time. Having previously managed the animal shelter system in Maricopa
County in Arizona, and with twenty years in shelter management, Boks is the first AC&C Executive
Director with actual experience running an animal shelter.  

In 2004, Boks agrees to sign on for a full two-year term, but his time at the AC&C is marked by
growing animosity between him and the DOH and with the AC&C Board of Directors. He discovers
falsification of safety inspections by DOH inspectors, misuse of statistics, and outright hostility and
incompetence by DOH personnel. Boks attempts to institute reforms, which are opposed by the
AC&C board.

Despite the 2002 amended City Council law, by the end of 2004 the DOH has failed to file plans for
full-service shelters in the Bronx and in Queens.  In fact, in 2004 the Bloomberg administration tries to
change the law and get rid of the requirement for full-service shelters in the Bronx and Queens.  But
that change is never approved by the City Council.







.

Through the work of the Mayor’s Alliance, AC&C euthanasia rates (which were as high as 75-80% in
2002), steadily decline while rescue and adoptions numbers rise.  Maddie’s Fund awards its first
grant to the Mayor’s Alliance in January 2005, and anticipates spending a total of $24.4 million over
seven years “to help the Mayor's Alliance end the killing of healthy and treatable shelter dogs and cats
community-wide.”  With monies in hand, the Mayor’s Alliance is able to pay its members a flat amount
for every animal pulled to help defray their costs, and to embark on various programs (e.g., low cost
micro-chipping and spay/neuter, special grants to rescuers, major adoption events).  (Rescuers who
are not part of the Mayor’s Alliance do not receive reimbursement funds.)

But as the years pass, rescuers face increasing and crushing costs of nursing animals that had
become sick during their stay at the AC&C.  The AC&C shelters are vectors of disease, exposing all
animals to a cold/flu virus.  Rescuers (and adopters) pay mounting medical fees to nurse animals
back to health. Moreover, the number of animals flowing into the shelters remains steady, fluctuating
between 39,000 to 44,000. This steady flow of animals is channeled into already overcrowded
shelters.

Various AC&C rescuers and volunteers criticize how animals are selected to be euthanized for
“behavior” , “disease.”   In almost all cases, the “disease” is an upper respiratory infection that
animals catch at the AC&C shelters, and the behavior "tests" leave much to be desired in how they
are administered.  Finally, when animals are euthanized for lack of "space," we should remember
that the DOH refuses to create shelters in the Bronx and Queens to prevent overcrowding.







The DOH does not renew Boks’s contract, and Mary Martin is selected to succeed him.  Martin’s
background is in veterinary science (she had worked with Boks in the Maricopa County shelter in
Arizona, but is not a veterinarian), but has no experience in managing an animal shelter.  During her
term as Executive Director, Martin does not make waves.  She neither offends nor challenges the
DOH.  She is politic, likeable, and hands-off.  Her term is uneventful.

In June 2006 NYC’s Comptroller issues another audit of the AC&C.  Compared to the previous audit
(conducted by Hevesi’s staff), Comptroller Thompson’s audit is far less scathing, but notes
persistent problems: cleanliness, sick animals not segregated from healthy, segregated, dogs not
exercised,  effective use of volunteers.  (All of those problems, plus many others that the audit failed to
note, continue to date. )

Also in June, the SRAC sues to remove the Mayor and three other city officials, including the Health
Commissioner, from controlling the AC&C Board of Directors, alleging conflict of interest and
malfeasance of their fiduciary duty.  (In October 2007, the complaint is dismissed on technical
grounds, the judge ruling that the SRAC has no “standing” to seek (i.e., no legally recognizable
interest in) seeking such relief from the DOH.  Consequently, the SRAC defers to the Charities
Bureau of the New York State Attorney General’s office for enforcement.  That Bureau does nothing,
neither investigating nor responding to the SRAC's periodic requests on the status of its
investigation..  The SRAC recognizes that the key to changes lies in amending state law and
depriving the Mayor of the power over animal care matters.)  

In defiance of the 2002 amended City law, by the end of 2006 the Bronx and Queens still do not have
full-service shelters.









In April, Executive Director Martin leaves to take a job in Los Angeles running a free spay/neuter
service.  For the next several months, AC&C board member Bruce Doniger, a successful
businessman with no prior experience managing an animal shelter, serves as Interim Executive
Director.  

In October, the AC&C board hires Charlene Pedrolie as Executive Director. Her background is in
restructuring troubled companies; she has no prior shelter management experience.  During her two-
year term, Pedrolie faces increasing controversy and vitriolic attacks.  Yet, she initiates a number of
innovations advocated by experienced volunteers, such as (1) a dog-walking program for non-
adoptable shelter dogs (prior management did not believe that dogs not up for adoption need to be
walked, no matter how long their stay in a shelter), (2) a Cruelty Seizure Committee to oversee the
care, rehabilitation, and placement of animals removed from abusive or cruel circumstances, and (3)
a volunteer-based Compassion Program for dogs slated to be euthanized.  Predrolie also requires
that every dog be provided with a blanket and toy and arranges to have AC&C animals regularly
showcased on the NBC “Today Show.”  

While euthanasia numbers continue to decrease, the AC&C is unable to stem the epidemic of
respiratory infection (URI) afflicting the Shelter animals.  









In November, the DOH green-lights the start of the long-delayed installation of a new HVAC system in
the Manhattan shelter.  The DOH claims the new system will reduce the amount of the cold/flu virus in
that shelter. For the two years the project is expected to last, the Manhattan shelter is a noisy, dusty,
and dangerous construction site, with adoptable animals housed in a garage and the balance
squeezed in the building that is under construction. Critics challenge the DOH’s decision to spend
time and money trying to renovate a building whose very footprint and age make it eminently
unsuitable for an animal shelter.  HVAC or not, the cold/flu virus will continue at the shelter
.  
The DOH acquires a former Bronx library, projected to be the long-ordered Bronx animal shelter.  The
neighboring community brings their NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) protests and the DOH backs off.  










In June, the rescue group Stray From the Heart (SFTH) sues the DOH for failure to create full- service
shelters in the Bronx and Queens, thereby subjecting AC&C animals to overcrowding and disease in
the existing shelter buildings. In September, the trial judge grants SFTH’s petition and orders the
shelters be created.  That same month, Dr. Thomas Farley succeeds Dr. Thomas Frieden as DOH
Commissioner.  The DOH files a notice to appeal the SFTH ruling.  

In October, without explanation, the AC&C board declines to renew Pedrolie’s contract and appoints
corporate attorney Risa Weinstock as Interim Executive Director.   Weinstock previously served as
general counsel for the AC&C for less than a year before resigning. Weinstock has no prior
experience managing an animal shelter.  

One of Weinstock’s first duties is to file a proposal with the DOH for a new contract for animal care
and control services.  As with every prior contract, the “negotiations” are non-existent.  The AC&C has
no bargaining power.  The AC&C must accept whatever the DOH decides to give it.

The Board also announces even more cuts to the AC&C’s already insufficient budget, bringing the
AC&C’s per capita funding to approximately $ 0.87 (when the Humane Society of the United States
dictates that such funding should range from $4 to $7 per capita).  As the ASPCA noted back in 2004,
“New York City has the lowest-funded animal control program in the United States …”.   That holds
true today.

Volunteers are increasingly dispirited.  Tensions between staff and volunteers grow.

In mid-October, a group of AC&C volunteers, rescuers, donors, and adopters petition Dr. Farley to (1)
select an experienced, proven, independent, and innovative Executive Director for the AC&C, (2)
abandon its appeal of the Stray From the Heart ruling and create shelters in the Bronx and Queens,
(3) replace the current AC&C directors with true animal advocates who owe no allegiance to the DOH
or to the Mayor, and (4) increase AC&C funding, and (5) publicly acknowledge the crisis confronting
the AC&C.

In his response, Dr. Farley regurgitates his predecessor's stance: We’re doing what’s needed,
euthanasia is down, and we won’t discuss our failure to create shelters in the Bronx and Queens.  By
his response, Farley signals that he will follow the blueprint set by his predecessors at the DOH and
on the AC&C board: delay, deny, and deflect.  

As the DOH stalls, rescue groups like Stray from the Heart are forced to continue shouldering the
costs of the DOH’s neglect of, and indifference to, the plight of the city’s homeless pets. The City
Council fails to take any action against the DOH, even though the DOH has violated a local law set by
the Council.

The number of abandoned and owner-surrendered pets increases daily due to a poisonous
confluence of events: (1) the worsening economy (as people lose their jobs and homes, their pets
end up on the streets or at the AC&C), (2) a recent New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) rule
limiting ownership of animals in public housing to one pet per household and banning certain dogs
by weight and breed, and (3) decades-long failure by the City to provide massive and free spay/neuter
services.   








In April 2010, the DOH selects Julie Bank as the newest AC&C Executive Director (the 8th ED in
Bloomberg’s administration).  In June, the AC&C shuts it doors to new volunteers, and takes 7
months to create a new volunteer program which ultimately proves to be a failure.  Ms. Bank faces
decreasing budget monies from the DOH.  In response, the AC&C announces reduction or
elimination of key services announced Sept. 2010.  The AC&C embarks on fundraising activities
which result in little success.  The City and the DOH file their appeal from the decision in Stray From
the Heart, in which a trial judge rules that they must follow the law and create shelters in the Bronx
and Queens.








For the first time in their 16 year history, the AC&C Directors vote to create a Fundraising Committee,
headed by AC&C Chairman, Dr. Farley.  Don’t forget, Dr. Farley is also the DOH Commissioner, and
directly responsible for the disastrous cuts to the AC&C’s budget.  The AC&C Volunteer Program
continues to be all form but no substance: few volunteers are to be seen at the shelters.  In April
2011, a mid-level appeals court reverses the trial judge’s decision in Stray From the Heart v. DOH, et
al.  The appeals court rules that a rescue group has “no standing” to sue the DOH for its failure to
build animal shelters in the Bronx and Queens.  This decision should be a call to arms for City
residents and animal lovers to demand that the DOH be held accountable for years of injustice to our
City’s homeless animals.  Let’s create something positive from this dreadful decision.  The time for
the DOH’s stranglehold over the AC&C must end.




Return to top  

Shelter Reform Home Page
 
Shelter Reform Action Committee (SRAC)
ShelterReform.org: Everything you ever wanted to know about the AC&C, but were afraid to ask.