County commissioners used the July 28 workshop to raise constituent complaints about stray and feral animals in the unincorporated area and to ask staff for program options, including interlocal agreements with municipalities and modest budgeted funding.
Lede: Commissioners and staff described repeated citizen reports of unclaimed dogs and cats, noted limited local shelter capacity, and discussed whether to pursue an interlocal agreement with nearby cities or to fund limited county-level services.
Why it matters: Animal-control calls impose recurring costs on local government, affect public health and livestock, and often fall to county officials when animals are picked up outside municipal boundaries. Staff and commissioners said they lacked a ready solution and that building a county shelter would be costly.
Details: After discussion, the court asked staff to include a $20,000 line item in the wild-animal control/trapper budget as an initial allocation (the staff entry moved the wild-animal control total to about $61,400 when combined with other line items in that section). Commissioners referenced existing municipal shelters (discussed in the meeting as often full) and emphasized that an interlocal agreement — one that clarifies pickup responsibilities and cost-sharing — would probably be the most practical first step rather than building county infrastructure.
Outcome: Commissioners directed staff to research options (interlocal agreements, contracts with nearby shelters, and incremental funding) and return with cost estimates and proposed language for agreements.
Ending: Staff will return with proposed interlocal agreement drafts or other vendor options and cost estimates to inform a future budget amendment or appropriation.