Residents press town council for timeline, transparency after report of suspected neglect at Cheshire dog pound

Dozens of Cheshire residents urged the Town of Cheshire Town Council on April 8 to act quickly and transparently after state Department of Agriculture reports and recent Freedom of Information Act requests surfaced allegations of poor conditions and animal deaths at the municipal dog pound.

The public comments, which lasted more than an hour, included accounts from volunteer rescuers, people who visited the pound and witnesses to animal care. “We will continue to ask because the public deserves the truth,” said Jean Melendez, a Cheshire resident and animal advocate, describing alleged failures in care and recordkeeping at the pound.

Why it matters: Residents say the town’s handling of animal-control operations and its communications about an ongoing third‑party investigation into the pound have left them without basic facts such as completion dates and regular status updates. Several speakers asked the council to set a timeline and to accept outside input from local advocates.

Council response and process: Mayor Peter J. Talbot acknowledged the emotion in the room and said the town is trying to avoid compromising an active, independent investigation. “We want to do this right,” he said, explaining that silence from officials reflected efforts to protect the integrity of the review. Councilor Diane Allard told speakers she supported using nationally accredited standards to shape future pound practices and said she had not instructed anyone to remove protesters’ signs from private property.

Residents and advocates pressed the council for specifics including the expected finish date of the investigation and whether any personnel actions would follow. Dawn Burnell, who called for accountability and reform, said advocates want to be included in solutions and offered constructive input rather than being treated as adversaries. Mariah Melendez, who leads a local advocacy group, told the council the group will continue its public campaign until the town finalizes reforms.

Several petitioners cited a Department of Agriculture consent order and witness statements from the state’s investigations, including testimony that described animals in poor condition and examples of kennel cleaning practices that witnesses said risked animals’ health. Speakers also raised concerns about incomplete or delayed online updates about the pound’s operations.

What the council said it would do: Town Manager Jim Kimble said he would inquire about the timeline and get back to residents; Council members said they would request a timeline from the investigator and provide whatever information can be released without jeopardizing the inquiry. Multiple councilors in the meeting denied directing Cheshire Academy or other third parties to take down signs posted by advocates — an allegation several speakers had raised.

Discussion vs. decision: The council did not take any formal action on April 8 to change pound operations or personnel. Councilors repeatedly distinguished between the ongoing independent investigation (which prompted an official noncomment policy while the probe runs) and the possibility of future policy or staffing actions once that investigation concludes.

What remains unanswered: Speakers sought a specific date for the investigator’s report and requested regular public updates. The council agreed to seek a timeline but did not set a public deadline at this meeting.

Ending: Several residents said they would return to future meetings until they see “meaningful reforms,” and councilors said they would attempt to deliver a timeline consistent with preserving the investigation’s integrity.