The volunteers who commit their time to Zani’s Furry Friends rescue group may share their devotion to animals, but they themselves cannot be pigeonholed. 

They come on Sunday mornings, bags in tow, to the PetCo on the Upper East Side. They assemble and stack crates, pull cats from meowing, thrashing bags and set up camp. They bicker over which cat goes where and who gets what blanket until everything is meticulously in place.

Michelle, a regular volunteer, ties ribbons around the cats’ necks. She calls it the “beautification process.”

“The ribbons can be controversial,” she says. “I think ribbons are the least of these cats’ worries.”

Then they spend the day trying to get the cats adopted.

They are an NYU professor who speaks six languages, a trained psychoanalyst, a CEO of a high finance company and students struggling to afford college or even make it into the city to volunteer their time. One woman works in fashion, another works in a government office, one is a hospice nurse, one a former journalist. They worry about their children and have passions unrelated to animals, they discuss the significance of astrological signs and planetary activity, they pride themselves on being good judges of character.

One volunteer, Jacqui, who regularly shows up in heels, smelling of honeysuckle or jasmine, says: “I can’t paint or draw, so I dress up.”

But don’t ever ask these women how many cats they own at any given time; they won’t tell you. They’ve learned the hard way. When you’re in rescue, you don’t tell people how many cats you have packed away at home, rotating in and out of the fickle system.

You get strange looks, people shy away and the neighbors in your co-op start to wonder. As one woman says, when you work in rescue — with groups like Zani’s, which take pets off the euthanasia list — you do not choose which pets to adopt. You adopt the un-adoptable.

And yes, for the most part, these volunteers are all women. Several note they got involved at a point when they felt they needed a change in their lives.

Tiffani, a 17-year-old volunteer with Zani’s who commutes from the Bronx, explains: “There are a lot of volunteers who come and go, but no guys. I think we freak them out.”

She adds: “I saw a guy volunteering one time. I came back and he was out the door.”

Valerie, Zani’s expert on cat behavior and nutrition, explains women tend to be more drawn to cats in general.

“Women, especially older women, get into cats, when they’re not valued by society in the same way,” she says. “Cats are warm and affectionate — they fill a void.”

Valerie is careful to distinguish between those who hoard cats as they might other material possessions — the stereotypical “crazy cat lady” — and many of the women in rescue.

“I’m not a crazy cat lady,” she emphasizes.

Valerie, who originally got involved with rescue because she was looking for something to do, says she keeps her place clean and wants few possessions. She concedes sometimes, however, she finds herself wearing a “blanket of cats” while watching television.

Further, Valerie explains there’s an adage that tends to ring true — when you’re young you want a dog, when you mature you want a cat. Despite any stereotypes, cats, like one or two of Valerie’s, still have the potential to be incredibly needy. Cats are very social creatures, just not perhaps in the way we understand — or desire — socialization.

They may have prodigious knowledge of the animal world, but Jacqui says Zani’s volunteers are really just regular people.

She describes a fundraising benefit Zani’s threw the night before our interview, complete with cabaret acts. “Someone called us the prettiest girls in rescue,” Jacqui says.

A few other volunteers scoff at this remark, betraying their no-nonsense attitude. “There’s a reason we’re no-nonsense,” says Valerie, when I point this out. “We go through hell.”

“I don’t know, Anjellicle [Cats Rescue] is very pretty,” offers another. Anjellicle, a “competitor” to Zani’s, occupies the temporary PetCo home on Saturday afternoons. Unlike Anjellicle, Zani’s also rescues dogs and the occasional rabbit or bird.

Dismayed perusers often come in looking to hold the cuddly kittens Anjellicle shows. Zani’s peppers their cages with signs forbidding all but the most interested from touching their cats, as illnesses are easily spread to the stressed animals.

Young people, who adopt from shelters, tend to enjoy the playfulness of a young kitten, but sometimes they return the cats when the animals age and lose their liveliness or when the pet would rather play with another kitten and have nothing to do with its owner. Zani’s does everything in its power to combat this mentality.

“People don’t really understand cat behavior,” says Valerie, “but once you get it, you get it.” She explains a cat’s head-butt is the ultimate sign of love and respect.

Valerie points to a statistic about Americans: approximately 70 percent of Americans say they prefer dogs, while something like 25 percent prefer cats.

Yet cats have overtaken dogs statistically as pets in the United States. The seeming discrepancy is explained by the fact that cat-owners tend to own more than one cat.

The hands-on experience of showing the cats in-store is essential, as rescue groups like Zani’s have saturated the internet market. Pictures and bios of the animals, written and rewritten tirelessly by volunteers, also play a critical role in whether an animal will be placed. Valerie says people respond best to visual depictions.

Sometimes which cats will get adopted — if any — just depends on the day.

One woman browses the cats while I talk to the volunteers. I ask if she’s interested in adopting. “I’ve got eight animals,” she says, sheepishly, “but it’s so hard not to look.” Others meander by and stuff dollar bills into the group’s donation jars.

Jacqui says the group is financially indebted to their veterinarian. Besides squatting at PetCo once a weekend, Zani’s operates entirely out of volunteers’ apartments.

The founder and executive director of Zani’s, who asked to remain anonymous, started volunteering at the ACC of NYC shelter years back when she realized “the real need is in rescue.” While working at the shelter and for a rescue group, she was told she was too good, and needed to form her own organization. Allergic to cats at the time, she began her own dogs-only group, and says Zani’s grew from there.

She adds cat rescue is like the mafia. “Once you’re in, you can’t get out,” she says, while clipping a cat’s nails. (She often clips the nails of passersby’s pets or offers up solicited — or unsolicited — pet advice.)

For all its struggles, Zani’s has just as many success stories, including adoptive parents who write in to thank Zani’s, saying their newfound pets have been more therapeutic than they could have imagined.

“They rescue us more than we rescue them,” explains Jacqui.

About a month after two transitional homeless shelters housing 200 homeless families opened on West 95th Street, some residents and local elected officials are still vocally opposed to the facilities.

The two buildings—at 316 and 330 W. 95 St.—are on a residential block between West End Avenue and Riverside Drive. They serve as emergency shelters—opened because the city needed more beds to support the growing homeless population.

Local residents argue that housing the homeless is not the intended purpose for the two buildings and that the neighborhood, already home to several other shelters, shouldn’t have to take on another one. A nighttime fire that broke out Aug. 28 on the fourth floor of 316 W. 95th St. has heightened concerns for some about the facilities. Other residents are concerned about the shelters’ close proximity to a school and a playground.

Stephanie Martinez, 19, who lives with her family on the Upper West Side, is one such resident.

“It’s a bad idea,” Martinez said. “I’ve been living here for 10 years, and my brother goes to school at P.S. 75. We don’t know the backgrounds [of the shelter residents].”
But one middle-aged man who was moving into one of the buildings last week with his son said that neighbors should think twice before complaining about the shelters.
“I don’t have empathy for the $100-250,000 per year homeowner,” the man said. “The poor used to be up and down the street here. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.”
But other residents and local electeds insist that it’s far from a “not in my backyard” attitude that informs their opposition to the shelters. The concern is more about the type of buildings the homeless families are moving into, and who should live there. These are single-room occupancy buildings (SROs)—small individual apartments with a shared bathroom and kitchen. Some Upper West Siders say these buildings should be occupied by low-income rent payers—yet SRO owners and landlords are able to make much more money by renting the space to Homeless Services, which pays a monthly rent of $3,000 for each room.

“The buildings should be for ordinary New York rent-paying people,” said Avi, a neighborhood resident who declined to give his last name. “The buildings should not be fodder for real estate speculators who have managed to raise rents in this city to levels unaffordable to ordinary people.”

Upper West Side Councilmember Gale Brewer agrees, and she, along with other local leaders, voiced her opposition to Homeless Services even before the shelters opened up.
“These buildings we want to be permanent housing,” Brewer said. “We want similar residents who have longstanding community ties to be residents.”

Mark Diller, the chairperson of Community Board 7, said that the use of the SROs as homeless facilities is counterproductive when it comes to solving the overarching goal—reducing homelessness and building up the affordable housing stock for local residents.

“The problem is that by the shelter taking up these units, you’re eliminating 200 units of otherwise affordable housing,” Diller said. “The SRO Law Project tries to make sure that what’s left of the affordable housing stock is preserved. It’s very troubling. … You want everyone to be able to live permanently in the community. [You’re creating] the problem that you’re trying to solve.”

Assemblymember Linda Rosenthal, who represents the Upper West Side, shares Diller’s viewpoint, adding that by placing the homeless in these buildings, the city is rewarding Robert Hess, a former DHS commissioner who now operates the shelters, for his multiple housing violations as a landlord.

“This homeless problem is just made worse by the city recycling people into units that should be permanent housing, and rewarding someone who breaks the law,” Rosenthal said.

The middle-aged homeless man said that this year’s elimination of the Advantage Program, a rental subsidy that helped to pay one or two years of rent support to eligible households, led to a sharp decline in the neighborhood’s affordable housing.

“There is no reasonable housing program, period,” he said, adding that opponents of the West 95th Street shelters should advocate for affordable low-income housing in the neighborhood.

According to the Fair Share Doctrine, each community must do its part in providing for the poor. Diller believes that the Upper West Side has more than its share of homeless residences: In the West 90s, the Narragansett, the Senate, Camden Hotel and Yale/Rose, to name a few, already provide housing for the homeless; and 21 percent of the city’s vulnerable population is housed on the Upper West Side, Diller said. Because the 95th Street shelters are emergency transitional housing, Homeless Services was able to bypass its usual neighborhood Fair Share review.

“This is us saying we’ve done our fair share several times over,” Diller said. “They’re using emergency certification as an excuse not to do the public review.”

Heather Janik, the DHS spokeswoman, said the agency is doing its part in communicating with the community.

“Our Agency has a legal mandate to provide temporary, emergency shelter to homeless individuals in need, and opened a shelter on West 95th Street so that our clients can live and be served with dignity and respect,” Janik said. “We have been actively communicating with elected officials from the beginning of this process and engaged in open dialogue with community leaders, and will maintain positive relations with residents in the surrounding neighborhood.”

UWS Residents Want Their Trees Skirted
As New York enters the lazy days of the end of the summer, Upper West Side residents have not been idle. Recently, Council Member Gale Brewer has received so many calls about tree skirts that she was compelled to take action. Brewer heard from constituents on Columbus Avenue that several trees and lampposts had been summarily stripped of their coverings. According to a letter that Brewer sent to Department of Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan, demanding answers to the perplexing case, the tree skirts and lamppost collars have been removed from the four corners of West 75th Street and Columbus Avenue, as well as from two corners of West 74th Street and Columbus Avenue. The Upper West Side community is normally quite vigilant about maintaining pleasant and historically correct streetscapes, so it should come as no surprise to the DOT that locals are calling for answers. Brewer politely asked the DOT to return the swiped skirts as well as inform the community why they disappeared in the first place.

Free Summer Concerts Continue
The Lincoln Square Business Improvement District is hosting free outdoor concerts for the lunch crowd every Wednesday in August, from 12-2 p.m., in Richard Tucker Park. On Aug. 15, the Opera Collective will be bringing some classical fare to the park with an Opera in the Square afternoon. The Aug. 22 concert will be “Pop to Beatlemania” with Andy Suzuki & The Method and The Meetles, and the series will wrap up Aug. 29 with The Brotherhood of the Jug Band Blue and the Ukuladies playing early American tunes. The park is on West 66th Street from Broadway to Columbus Avenue. Music lovers are encouraged to bring their lunch and something to sit on to watch the show.

Locals Rally Against Homeless Shelters
The Department of Homeless Services (DHS) is plowing ahead with its plan to house 200 homeless families in single room occupancy (SRO) buildings on the Upper West Side. Despite the strident objections of the community board, City Council Member Gale Brewer, Assembly Member Linda Rosenthal, State Sen. Adriano Espaillat and Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, DHS announced earlier this week that they will begin moving homeless residents into the buildings at 316 and 330 W. 95th St.

The buildings are serving as emergency shelters, meaning that DHS doesn’t have to adhere to normal regulations governing where shelters can be placed. The buildings operated as illegal hotels until recently and the owners were fined $600,000 by the city. Instead of returning the SRO units to their originally intended uses, to house low-income residents in small, cheap apartments, the landlords have turned to DHS to offer the buildings as emergency shelters. In return, DHS pays $111.99 per unit per day. Residents and local pols aren’t happy with this choice.

“New Yorkers understand that all neighborhoods share in the responsibility to provide housing to those in need,” said Stringer. “But abruptly moving a 400-person shelter into a residential neighborhood in the dead of summer with no community consultation, no contract and no long-term plan only creates bad will and sets back the cause of fighting homelessness.”

Officials have repeatedly asked DHS to address the neighborhood’s concerns—chiefly that the sudden influx of residents who may have substance abuse or mental health problems will tax the local police and safety resources to the breaking point—but say that they haven’t gotten any satisfactory answers.

“While we all support helping those seeking shelter, it is unjust and unwise to oversaturate one neighborhood through these emergency provisions, especially when it already has its fair share,” said Espaillat. “From the beginning of this process, DHS has failed to communicate with community leaders, enable a public process and notify neighbors.”

One of the biggest criticisms has been of the secrecy of the plan.

“The process should have included a substantive planning discussion with Community Board 7, elected officials, current residents of the two buildings and responsible neighborhood leaders to find a solution to the need for shelter for homeless individuals,” said Brewer.
On Tuesday, residents and politicians came out to protest the move and ask the city to halt the process, but so far there has been no indication that DHS will be heeding those calls.