Thursday, February 21, 2013

UPDATE ON THE DRAMA AT SAN BERNARDINO CITY SHELTER

That didn't take long. Seems Maria Sanchez learned a lesson. Problem is that Dave has the dog back. No, Maria, you didn't do a good deed. You failed to see this man for what he was and now you have put this poor dog back in the hands of a person who should not have a pet. Considering that this was done to condemn the shelter, it didn't quite work out the way it was intended.


DAVE AND BUZZ UPDATE:
I just got a phone call from KTLA channel 5. Apparently, Dave has called to inform them that I am keeping the money raised for his dog. I have transferred $842.07 into my bank to reimburse myself for the shelter fees, vet and PetSmart shopping spree that I put onto my personal credit card. I had a discussion regarding the remainder of the donations and how he would like to spend them. I said it would be a good idea to pay off any outstanding tickets so that he will not be taken to jail in the future for having a warrant for unpaid traffic tickets. I asked if he had any bills that were due at the time. I told him that every dime that was donated would go to him and Buzz, but that I would not be giving him the cash. I explained to him that the money that was donated was a blessing for him, I wanted to be sure that we respected that and used the donations responsibly. He sat next to me and nodded his head, Not one response, question or concern.

After I hung up with KTLA channel 5, I tried to call Dave. His wife would not let me speak to him. She screamed at me that I was stealing their dog’s money. She said they have called the news stations and that if I did not give them their money, they were going to call the police.

I am exhausted from this entire experience. This is the last thing I needed or expected. I will not be giving Dave or his wife one single penny, what I will do is refund the money that was donated to Dave. I have had my life and the lives of my children devastated by drug addiction. I will play no part in supporting anyone’s habit. I just can’t.

That being said, if you would like me to refund your donation that was made for Dave, please email me at mcs1030@aol.com and put REFUND as the subject. I will send the refund tonight. If you would like to transfer your donation that was for Dave to another urgent animal in this album, please email mcs1030@aol.com and put DONATE TO URGENT SBC DOG. I will put your donation towards a homeless animal that will live or die depending on whether or not a rescue has the funds to help them. If I do not get a response within 1 week of this posting, I will refund the amount donated with an explanation of why it is being refunded. I know not all who have donated will see this post.

So to sum this up, I have been reimbursed for all expense to rescue Buzz from the high kill San Bernardino City Shelter and reunite him with his owner Dave Thomas. There are donations leftover. The donations will NOT go to Dave after the stunt he has pulled. If you still want Dave to have your donation, I will have to ask you to send it to him personally. I do not have an email for him, maybe he will post it.

No good deed goes unpunished, right?

Thank you for understanding why I cannot proceed with this as planned. For those who disagree with my decision, please keep your thoughts to yourself. I don’t think I can take another hit right now.

23 comments:


  1. Ms. Sanchez states: "I don’t think I can take another hit right now."

    Consider the attacks/threats that Ms. Sanchez and other so called "activists" have made against the staff at the City of San Bernardino shelter and the Devore shelter. These unrelenting, hateful attacks have been going on for years.

    And yet, the staff remain polite and courteous to these same "activists"; staff remain at their jobs because they truly care about the animals, continuing to try to better the condition for animals.

    Maybe there is more story here than Dave and Buzz.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I cant tell you how many dogs she has been involved in to some point that have suffered. Yet always claims to be just a net-worker.

      Delete


  2. How sad - that "activists" would deliberately take advantage of a situation, that - to the viewing, naive public - seems like a kind and helpful thing. Yet, the real motive was to bring condemnation to the city shelter and the police department and to provide a fundraising opportunity.

    ReplyDelete



  3. If the honest intent was to help Dave and Buss, then why not quietly - among themselves - raise the money to help?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Note that Sanchez is keeping some of the money raised. She is not giving it to Dave. People donated that money to him and his dog, not her.

      Delete
    2. she transferred all the donated funds into her personal bank account..she borrowed against donated funds...this lady should have given all the donated funds to the dog owner so he could get his own dog out of the pound then he could have went on a shopping spree with his dog but this lady took it upon herself to use personal money to get the dog out and went on a shopping spree then reimbursed herself with donated funds..ALL THE FUNDS DONATED WENT INTO HER PERSONAL ACCOUNT...i commented on her page and she deleted my comments..way to miss use funds

      Delete
    3. NOT TRUE... She put back into her account what she spent on pulling the dog and had put on her credit card. It was those who donated the money that asked her NOT to give cash to this man. We asked her to pay the vetting fees, the pull fees, to purchase things for the dog , to offer to pay his tickets so he did not lose the dog again and then what was left over was to go for food etc for the dog if requested by the owner. The owner was offered a job. If he would have taken that job then he would have been able to care for the dog himself and then the remaining funds would have gone to save another animal.Nobody had time to do a background check on this man and I would have done the same thing she did. Matter of fact many many of us did. We donated to bring them together. She even asked us if we wanted a refund after they began demanding cash wish was our wish not to do. We had a choice to get our money back or use it to save another animal . It was our choice. She would have gladly given us a refund. Do you people seriously believe everything you hear? Do any of you know Maria? I do not personally know her but I know people who do. Those who have worked with her and have nothing to gain from doing so have told me many good things about her. So before you believe everything you hear. do a FACT check.......................

      Delete
    4. The only one here with no facts is yourself. You stated you don't know her personally, then how do you know she returned any money requested? Have you see her financials on the claims you and she make? And BTW, is your "donation" tax deductible?

      No reputable rescue would have done it the way she did it, period. And now the poor dog is out there, God only knows where, and with a drug abuser who stands a good chance of being sent to jail. Then what happens to the dog? Maybe you have people who can vouch for this woman, the people I know have no use for her.

      Delete
    5. " Note that Sanchez is keeping some of the money raised. She is not giving it to Dave. People donated that money to him and his dog, not her." Funny have you asked her to show you receipts of the pull fee, the neuter, the license, the shots and the items from Pet smart? If you have not then how can you accuse her of keeping the money? Funny she offered us back the money we donated over and above what expenses she had paid herself before all pledges were met. Now if she were going to keep it all for herself would she offer it back to us knowing we did not want her handing out cash? Nope think not. This guy and his wife began demanding cash. She knew our wish was for her to control it and to make sure it went for the care of the dog as needed. We all stated we did not want him handed cash with our donations. She did as we asked and offered it back after expenses were paid and things were purchased FOR THE DOG and then they began wanting the cash. So FYI refunds have been offered ....... bet if you asked for receipts she would have them............ Unbelievable. Nobody not even a dope head walks to a shelter and sits with his dog if he does not love that dog..............I would have done exactly as she did. Many of us would have.

      Delete
    6. Are you asking the person who made the comment because it wasn't me, the Administrator. But it is true. In other words, Sanchez did her good deed expecting to be reimbursed and did in fact reimburse herself at your expense. What is she donating financially, looks like she is getting her good deed fully paid for. Not normally the case for a true rescue.

      Plus she is being judgmental, waving the money in front of this man as a treat if he does things her way. If you would do the same thing, then you are wrong and no friend to an animal.

      Delete

  4. Ms. Sanchez states: " I have had my life and the lives of my children devastated by drug addiction. I will play no part in supporting anyone’s habit. I just can’t."

    I am truly sorry that Ms. Sanchez and her family have been devastated by drug addiction. I understand why the activists would not want to give money to someone who might be an addict. It makes sense to worry that the money would be spent on drugs rather than the care of a pet.

    The organizers of any fundraiser have the responsibility of making sure the money is used wisely and for its intended purpose. People donated this money out of the goodness of their heart because they thought they would be helping a man and his dog. Perhaps the donors were not informed about a potential drug problem, perhaps they were - and they chose to give anyway. That is their choice.

    Did the fundraisers know this man had a possible drug addiction and they chose to raise funds to help him pay the fees to retrieve his dog?

    If so, but they still wanted the man to have his dog, then it would only have been fair to let the donating public know about a possible problem. Who knows! Maybe someone would help with addiction counseling for the family.

    In hindsight, perhaps the organizers should have raised the money to get the dog out of the shelter, but put additional money in an account. The money could be used to purchase dog food. The bag would be marked so the bag would not be returned for cash. Drive the dog food to the family so the organizers could check on the dog, establish a relationship with the family so that if there was an emergency, the family would know who to call.

    Or, once the needed money has been contributed, close the donating process.

    Seems there are ethical/moral issues as well as legal ones concerning the money which has been raised.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think Sanchez failed that dog by helping return it to the owner who is obviously irresponsible. But that is the No Kill mentality. I hope she doesn't do adoptions the same way, no vetting, no consideration for the type of person, but I bet she does.

      Delete
  5. It is extremely telling that anyone from this shelter would be making remarks against what this woman did.Your shelter is KNOWN for appalling conditions and $400 to rescue a dog after a few days is beyond unconscionable considering how little you DO for dogs in this "shelter".If you actually HAD any concern and hoped to decry what this woman did...YOU would need to step up...with CLEAN hands....and we all know you can't.What she did was the right thing to do.NO matter how we feel about the owner...there appears to be considerable attachment between him and his dog.Keeping the money "available" and yet NOT in his hands makes perfect sense.I would guess that he and his wife have "other" problems that they need money for but coming clean and being honest works a lot better than attacking a person who went out of her way to protect your dog from being killed for no reason.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. First of all, this blog is totally independent from any shelter and the remarks, posts are my own. Of course, I can make remarks about this woman, she screwed up royally. She should have never returned that dog to such a person, no home, going to serve time eventually for his misdeeds. You looked at a picture and made a judgement that this man cares for his dog. A picture! Is this how you judge things, by looking at a picture? And who said he wanted to come clean? He had his first conviction for drugs in 1999, this is an ongoing pattern. Go to the SB Superior court and look up his rap sheet.

      Yes, I will tell you that Sanchez could have taken another route in her quest but the one she took was done so with a personal vendetta. She wanted to condemn the shelter and did so. The shelter acted in the best interest of the dog, not Sanchez.

      The dog deserved better but No Kill made sure it doesn't get what it truly deserves, a good home with a responsible owner.

      Delete

  6. It amazes me that some of those in "No Kill" are so "obsessed" with their hatred and anger toward organizations and individuals.

    Everyone can always find ways to improve. However, negative, unfounded, inaccurate, emotionally charged criticism detracts from solving problems.

    Staff at the city and Devore shelters are very helpful and try to work with the public and rescue groups. I applaud them for their professionalism - sitting there, day after day, working with those "activists" who are condemning them, and enduring their intimidating remarks.

    This incident at the city shelter should be a real "eye opener" for our San Bernardino citizens, government officials, and reporters who were not aware of the attacks that these "activists/terrorists" have perpetrated against shelters, their staff and their volunteers.

    ReplyDelete
  7. i hate to state the obvious. it seems a bit premeditated. maria sanchez just sat and watched the man. if she was so worried about this man and his dog, why did'nt she stop taking photos of him and ask are you ok? can i help? maybe she was to busy thinking, how can i make some money without shipping another dog to another state. it is so disturbing. most of the "rescues" have delusions of grandeur. "rescue" has become the feel good pyramid scheme. you have the myers of the word that tell the worker bees to run here and run there. the one on the top gets all the donation$. they kick a few bucks down to the worker bees to adopt, board the dog for weeks-months and ship the dog from state to state. they never have to get out from behind the computer. very rarely do they even meet the dogs they are "rescuing". they are sending dogs from one shelter to another. if you don't believe me just make a few phone calls to washington or oregon animal shelters. the meyers suck people in who really want to help. most of the time the worker bee rarely knows what happen to the animals. they are busy taking order$ and doing the next pull. they need to remember the responsibility for the animals is not over just because they adopted the cat/dog from the shelter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kinda reminds you of the Zephyr case in the Carson shelter where the No Kill "rescuer" put a hold on the dog, walked by it for five weeks, took a picture of the dog the night that it died, and left it there. Didn't take it out or to the vet. When the reporter asked her why she didn't take the dog that night when it was obviously dying, she responded her vet was already closed. Then she and Nathan Winograd filed a lawsuit against the County of LA. Set up if there ever was one. And Devore has had the No Killers try the same thing.

      Delete
  8. She was required by law to report any money she received to the IRS.

    You can't set just up a do it yourself charity

    She needs to file with the IRS and report all income

    I hope that people are reporting this to the state and feds

    ReplyDelete
  9. No Kill money scams are ripping people off every day

    all these facebook chipins, begging for money, the money often just disappears and gets spent on someone's personal life

    No Kill kills AND steals

    ReplyDelete
  10. Why don't city, county and state legislators enact laws that would regulate rescues and hold them accountable? By doing nothing, they turn a blind eye to possible animal suffering.

    Why don't veterinarians become involved as an oversight committee to monitor the transmission of disease and parasites.

    Why doesn't the IRS require an accounting of the thousands of dollars the transporters receive.

    Animal control officers and humane officers should be included to gather evidence about possible neglect

    The shelters are required to keep a log regarding the disposition of animals. Why aren't rescue groups?

    ReplyDelete
  11. I know Maria through Facebook and working with her on rescues. What she did was called standard protocol in any and every single rescue ever done. She did offer to take him on a shopping spree, buy him dog food, treats, toys, and anything he wanted for Buzz. But, he did not want ANYTHING for his beloved dog BUZZ, he only wanted money to get loaded. When Maria got hip to this after getting to know him, she decided it was fair to all the people who donated to pay for Dave to get a couple thousand dollars to just get loaded with! He refused all the help for his dog, period, flat out! This was not a scam or a woman who took advantage. Maria gives everyday of her life to rescuing animals on death row. She works with accredited 501C-3 Rescues. She kept NO MONEY for herself!! It ALL went to pay for Buzz's fines, paper work, license and Dave's tickets! To follow up on the questions above: All 501C-3 Rescues are required to follow strict standards set forth by city, county and state legislature. Veterinarians work with many 501C-3 Non-profits to help spay, neuter, vaccinate and treat animals. They are required by law to report any signs of abuse. All 501C-3 are required to report to the IRS as a Non-profit organization and pay any fees accordingly. All Animal Welfare Workers are required by law to report on paper about the conditions of every single animal that goes through the door of any Animal Shelter. Be it good, bad or neglect. Animal shelters do keep logs of all animals, their breed, sex, health, behavior, age, and any additional notes made by the intake coordinator. Ms. Maria Sanchez acted appropriate in every aspect of this rescue. She just so happen to be there when this man was looking for his dog. He was fortunate enough he even got his dog back. With out her, he would not have. He did not have the money to pay for all the fee's, fines, and license! Maria did her due diligence and did not feel it appropriate to give this much money to this man who's wife demanded the money or said "she would sue"! That says what they wanted... GREED, MONEY.. NOT FOOD TO FEED THEIR BUZZ!! This money it was raised by volunteers who were ALL OFFERED THEIR MONEY BACK OR to donate to another animal on DEATH ROW! I have first hand knowledge of this entire story and Maria would never stop an animal lover from getting money if it was going to their pet. The money was for Buzz, not DAVE! I hope you all have a little more clarity now. Maria is a an angel and has since saved hundreds and hundreds of dogs who would have other wise died! God Bless.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An angel? Hardly, in my opinion she is doing more harm than good. First hand knowledge? You know what she tells you, that's all. No one who knows how to rescue would have ever handled it that way. My question is how many more has she handled poorly. The woman doesn't have good sense.

      Delete
  12. Hi "Friends Administrator", I totally understand where you are coming from with regards to the the rescue being mishandled. The dog should probably not been released to a man who could not care for himself, let alone his dog. I honestly do not believe that Maria had all of the information regarding Dave's behavior, his money and drug and alcohol addiction until the dog had already been returned. If she had I feel she would have never put Buzz back into harms way. She saves animals from these situations every day and would never do this by intention. This was obviously a big misunderstanding and a regrettable mistake. I am sure she regrets the terms of the outcome just by reading her parting letter. No one is perfect. But I do know she works tirelessly to save the high risk dogs at the SB Shelter and has just recently been banned and arrested from there http://www.examiner.com/article/maria-sanchez-speaks-out-about-her-arrest-at-san-bernadino-animal-shelter She is only trying to save the dogs and risking her own life to do it. I do commend all the Devore / San Bernadino Staff and Volunteers they are all wonderful selfless humans who give their lives to help all the animals in need! May God Bless you All and may a new and better story be told out of all of this! Something new needs to happen at these shelters they need emergency help in a major way! I hope the people will rise up and unite together and stand up for the truth. Get the attention of the government and somehow turn these high kill shelters into NO KILL SHELTERS! We need some kind of miracle. Something must change urgently! Save the innocent animals! Thank you to everyone who gives & helps.

    ReplyDelete

Remember no accusations without proof. Rant if you will, it won't be published.