Oak Lawn residents press board over Animal Welfare League contract and pet-recovery practices

Lede: Residents and animal advocates at the Village of Oak Lawn Board of Trustees meeting on Sept. 9 pressed elected officials about the village—s contract with the Animal Welfare League and how stray animals are impounded and returned to owners.

Nut graf: Dozens of minutes of public comment focused on claims that the Animal Welfare League has held animals and impeded reunification with owners, and on whether Oak Lawn police and village legal staff properly applied the village—s impoundment ordinance. Village officials and the police chief responded at the meeting but did not announce any formal change to the contract or an ordinance.

Body: Kristen Adamiak, who said she is from Joliet, told trustees her father—s dog was held at the Animal Welfare League for 16 days after Oak Lawn police brought the animal there and that village staff declined a private meeting on the contract. "It states that after 72 hours of apprehension is when a dog or cat can be relinquished to animal welfare," Adamiak said, summarizing the village ordinance as she read it and arguing the contract conflicts with that requirement.

Paul Buck, who identified himself as a Chicago resident and the dog—s owner in one high-profile case, said his dog was picked up and was not returned for 16 days. "By the time I got the dog back, the dog was so stressed out," Buck said, describing visible weight loss and behavioral change.

Several other residents echoed those concerns. Kim Watonic, who said she previously filed litigation to try to obtain Animal Welfare League records, said the shelter spends heavily on legal fees and that she sought transparency about the facility—s practices. Jacqueline Masalco, who described herself as a hometown resident who helps with stray-dog recovery, read the village—s impoundment ordinance aloud and said owners had been told Oak Lawn does not hold animals for the 72-hour stray-hold period stated in the ordinance.

Mayor Terry Ford responded to the public comments by noting limits to the village—s authority. "Our ordinances apply to us, the village of Oak Lawn, and our police department," he said, adding that the village uses the Animal Welfare League because Oak Lawn lacks an in-house holding facility and sending animals to distant shelters takes police officers off the street.

Chief of Police (name not specified) spoke for the department and said the most common reason owners could not immediately reclaim animals was lack of proof of ownership or proof of vaccination. "The reason they couldn't get their dog back was because [the owner] had no proof of ownership, medical records, or vaccinations," the chief said, adding that he reviewed the contract and contacted the Illinois Department of Agriculture. "They had a valid license. I had the attorney review it. He said it is kind of boilerplate, but I had no issues with it, go ahead."

The chief said Oak Lawn—s animal-control officer recently resigned and the village is recruiting a replacement; he also said code-enforcement officers have a new chip reader to identify microchipped animals. "We are in the process of hiring another one," he said of the animal-control position, and noted staff training on chip readers.

The board did not take a formal vote on the Animal Welfare League contract at the meeting. Multiple trustees said they would review the village—s ordinances and the chief reiterated existing practices: owners who can provide proof of ownership and vaccinations can have animals returned, and the police department pays for shelter boarding only for three days under the contract terms the chief cited.

Ending: Trustees did not announce any immediate policy change; residents who spoke asked the board to review the contract and local procedures to improve transparency and reunification outcomes. The village indicated staff would revisit relevant ordinances and village practice, and the police department said it is hiring a new animal-control officer.