County Health Committee members spent the bulk of their Sept. 2 meeting on animal control operations, covering service calls, intake counts, fee schedules, intergovernmental agreements with villages, staffing proposals and liability questions.

Why it matters: Animal-control operations involve public safety, taxpayer costs, village partnerships and the care and disposition of animals; updating fees and agreements affects both county budgets and village residents.

Report and call volume: Jill, reporting for animal control in Angie’s absence, told the committee the office handled 71 calls in the month under review. Intake and case details included 14 dogs and eight cats (the report listed a horse and other livestock contacts), 11 alleged abuse calls, several lost/stray livestock reports (including cows and a stolen goat), multiple aggressive-dog calls, relinquishment requests and follow-ups. At the time of the meeting the shelter had several animals in care, some in foster, some returned to owners, and a small number were euthanized on veterinary recommendation.

Fees and intergovernmental agreements: Committee members said the existing fee schedule dated to 2010–11 is out of date. Members discussed a proposed $100 call-out fee suggested by a committee member (Chad) to cover mileage and staff time for remote calls. The committee directed members to compare the county’s fees with neighboring Kankakee County’s fees and asked staff to circulate fee schedules so members could prepare for an in-depth discussion next month. The committee also discussed sending updated intergovernmental-agreement drafts to villages and seeking attorneys’ review before asking villages to sign or continue case-by-case billing.

Policies, equipment and operations: Committee members proposed several operational policies and improvements: identifying county animal-control staff via department shirts, a policy limiting civilians on animal-control calls, requiring closed-toed shoes, standardizing an on-call dispatch phone (noted as purchased and budgeted), and clarifying ride-along and vehicle-use rules that must align with county HR and union policies. The committee agreed such policies should be reviewed by the county HR office and the state's attorney before adoption.

Staffing and budget items: Committee materials asked that Jake be made full-time; members were directed to review the proposed budget and come prepared to discuss making that position full-time. The committee also discussed kennel staffing (wardens performing kennel duties), potential contracted kennel workers who are paid per call, and the preferred use of local vendors for shirts and equipment.

Veterinary services and liability: The committee circulated a proposed list of veterinarian duties (well checks, rabies vaccines, euthanasia in severe/injured cases, low-cost vaccine clinics and annual low-cost microchip clinics) and planned to seek Dr. Roberts’s response about conflicts with her employer and to arrange a follow-up meeting with Paul, Jill and a committee member. The committee also raised insurance questions: risk staff (Myron) reported back that animals are treated as property under the county’s liability program and that euthanasia performed intentionally would likely be excluded from coverage; the committee asked for additional clarification on coverage for boarding, grooming and high-value animals in catastrophic events.

Website and payments: Committee members learned the animal-control registration and payment system is linked through the county website to a Shelter platform. The site supports online registration and credit-card payments but was described as not mobile-friendly; members suggested improving the web experience.

Next steps and oversight: The committee asked staff and Angie to prepare updated fee comparisons, intergovernmental-agreement drafts for attorney review, proposed operational policies (aligned with HR), and more detail on insurance coverage. No fees or agreements were adopted at the Sept. 2 meeting.

Quotations in context: The committee debated a $100 callout fee; Chad suggested, "Callout fee should be a $100." A committee member summarized the goal for fee updates: "We certainly need to cover our costs," and noted mileage and veterinary expenses should not be borne solely by the county.

The committee moved no motions to adopt fees or agreements on Sept. 2 and deferred decisions pending legal review, budget review and further discussion.