EDITORIAL: The opaque Boulder City

Boulder City Councilman Cam Walker once told the Review-Journal he still asks himself what he could have done differently when handling the alleged serial killing of pets taking place at the city’s animal shelter under former Supervisor Mary Jo Frazier.

The answer: Pretty much everything.

Mr. Walker’s expression of regret is likely the most sincere that Boulder City pet owners will receive from their municipal government. But given the fact that Frazier’s alleged misdeeds came to the attention of the city years before any action was taken — and that formal charges were only sought after the Review-Journal reported on the story — regret is small comfort.

Frazier was finally in handcuffs last week, facing two counts of felony animal cruelty after being indicted by a Clark County grand jury. She pleaded not guilty, and according to her attorney, she is adamant about her innocence.

But a substantial pile of evidence shows something horrific was happening at Boulder City’s animal shelter, and that city officials knew it. As early as 2009, the then-city manager demanded in a memo to know why euthanasia rates were so high at the shelter. (About half of the animals brought there since 2006 have been killed.) Longtime contract veterinarian Randy Stanton in 2010 asked why he hadn’t been asked to see an animal for a year. A family pet that was swiftly euthanized in 2011 prompted Mr. Stanton to ask for an investigation, and a city-ordered necropsy reportedly found discrepancies with Frazier’s claim that the dog had been hit by a car.

But it wasn’t until 2015 that a city police detective launched an official probe, which ended not in charges, but in a cover-up. Frazier was allowed to resign and quickly moved out of state. The administrator of police services (don’t call him “chief,” for double-dipping retirement reasons) Bill Conger said “we could drag this through the mud and it really doesn’t accomplish anything.” Quite convenient, given that animal control was one of his responsibilities.

The attention the story received in the Review-Journal, however, forced the city’s hand, and charges were eventually sought. Mr. Conger — who famously said “people get in trouble and resign all the time” — fulfilled his own prophecy and quit. And the case the city ignored found fertile ground, at least with the grand jury. Chief Deputy District Attorney Amy Ferreira summed it thusly: “This is not a standard case. The actions that this defendant took in this case are horrific.”

And the actions that the city took — or, more particularly, did not take — are equally bad. City managers knew. The police chief knew. Staffers knew. Contract employees knew, and tried to draw attention to the problem. But it took the negative publicity in the Review-Journal and the public protests that followed to force the insular, opaque Boulder City to act.

That city owes its citizens far more transparency and openness in the future than it has shown to this point in its history. Effective management would be appreciated as well. Those things will never replace the pain of loss from a pet that was improperly euthanized, but they are an adequate down payment on the debt of accountability still owed to the residents of Boulder City.