Multiple speakers used the Aug. 12 public comment period to press the Town Council for action and transparency after allegations of animal neglect at the Cheshire animal control facility were publicly raised earlier this year. Jean Melendez, representing an advocacy group, summarized the group’s concerns and urged the council to restore “transparency, accountability, justice, and change of the pound.”
Melendez told councilors the group has gathered eyewitness accounts, documents and ACO testimony and said the town’s system “seemed to be run like a sovereign nation, no records, no oversight.” She said a new investigation should not be the final word and asked the council to ensure “real answers, not just promises.”
Advocates asked the council why the alleged conduct has not led to immediate administrative leave for the employee identified in the public record and requested that the investigator’s report and town responses be made public, subject to lawful redactions. Holly Fontaine and other speakers asked directly, “Why is she being protected?” and said the animal control officer should be removed from duties involving animals pending the outcome of the inquiry.
Council members and the town attorney responded on the record: the town has commissioned an independent investigation and the council has received invoices and updates. Town Attorney D’Onofrio said the investigator’s bill to date was “a little under $60,000,” and he described legal and procedural constraints when a personnel investigation may be used in later employment actions. Several councilors noted the difficulty of convening a full council meeting to discuss personnel issues because of quorum rules and cautioned that some investigatory materials are legally protected.
Advocates pressed the council to release more information about the status and timeline for the investigation. Council Chair Peter Talbot and the town manager said they would meet with advocates to discuss next steps and that additional communications will be arranged, but they also warned that councilors cannot independently meet in groups that would create an unlawful quorum for decision‑making.
Why it matters: the allegations concern mistreatment and deaths of animals entrusted to a municipal facility. Advocates say the issue raises governance, transparency and public‑trust questions and want demonstrable corrective action and independent review. The council said it will follow the investigatory process and provide appropriate reports once legal and procedural constraints are addressed.
What’s next: council and town management said they expect additional materials from the investigator; advocates asked that the final report be released publicly with lawful redactions and that interim personnel safeguards be enforced.