|  |
 |
|
OPINION: Humane Society Clarifications |
Sarra Rexroad | 5/6/08
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After reading a recent article in the Pagosa Daily Post and after numerous e-mails back and forth with its editor, I find I need to clarify a few things. I had specifically asked Mr. Hudson not to print any of the content of my e-mails until I had a chance to actually speak with him, as I was in the process of a cross-country move. He chose instead to print his “interpretations” of those emails, which for the most part contradict what I actually said.
This isn’t about what people think of me on a personal level — everyone is entitled to their opinion — but I fear what has been said could damage the credibility of my writings about the Humane Society, so here we go.
 No, I did not ask Robbie Schwartz for an interview. I didn’t write articles, I wrote letters to the editor. Interviews are unnecessary and would not typically be done in such a format; this only seems to be an issue because of my journalism background. She was, however, asked for an interview by Rick Baker, when this all began. She chose to decline.
No, I was unable to attend a board meeting due to various personal circumstances. I was prepared to attend the meeting in January, only to be informed that Ms. Schwartz had changed the format so that it was an election-only meeting, for which only members eligible to vote were allowed to attend.
Yes, I have asked for the financial records: in person on two occasions, and via phone on three more. There was always some sort of excuse for why they were unavailable. In my calls, I did not feel the need to identify myself more specifically than as an HSPS volunteer. The financials should be available regardless of who wants to see them. They are now available on the HSPS website.
No, I did not always speak from first-hand experience. I compiled my letters with others who wanted to speak on the issue but had personal concerns that prevented them from being comfortable with their names being in the press. I did, however, make sure that all information provided was truthful and consistent. And yes, I have had personal experiences with Ms. Schwartz when I was helping out in the shelter. None were pleasant.
However, I’d like to remind Ms. Schwartz and Mr. Hudson that the financials were never my primary concern in all of the Humane Society (HSPS) issues. This started when Ms. Schwartz chose to “fib” to the community about the status of the new shelter when, in fact, the dogs were being housed in a storage unit. The animals are currently happy and healthy due to the dedication and hard work of the shelter employees. The thrift shop employees continue to do a fabulous job, and the shelter certainly counts on the hard work they do in order to keep the HSPS running smoothly as a whole.
Aside from one comment in the second letter I wrote, which I do publicly apologize for, I have not spoken of Ms. Schwartz’s personal character. Personality does not necessarily affect the quality of work a person does. In this instance, the tendency to belittle and scold employees and volunteers certainly affects the quality of work, and I am steadfast in the belief that Ms. Schwartz should treat these people better, lest she lose any more support.
I’ve been told that my association with the Pagosa Free Press has “caused some people to question [my] integrity as a journalist.” To that I say: Rick has never tried to manipulate my words to create a different picture as others have, and the Free Press was the publication willing to help when the HSPS asked for help to do something about the mismanagement.
I, as well as Baker and Sawicki, have also been called “gadflies” for “attacking people’s weak points,” but the “weak point” in this instance is something that affects the animals, HSPS employees, and our community.
For bringing that to public attention, I do not apologize.
Editor's Note: Ms. Rexroad wrote a few articles as a journalist for the Pagosa Daily Post a while back, and in that capacity she showed herself to reasonably thorough in her research. My questions to her, via email, concerned her integrity as a journalist after she published some less-thoroughly-researched "letters" to the Free Press. Some of her statements above are apparently in response to those questions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|