Riverton committee approves $1.63 million in claims; council questions third‑party background checks and animal care costs

RIVERTON, Wyo. — The Riverton finance committee recommended and the city council approved consideration of claims on June 17 totaling roughly $1,631,722, and council members used the discussion to question ongoing uses of a third‑party background‑check vendor and the city’s interim pet‑care expenses while the contracted shelter is full.

The claims summary presented to the committee listed "consideration of claims to be paid in the amount of $1,109,725.94; Elon credit card in the amount of $10,635.31; manual check in the amount of $48; payroll and liabilities for 05/30 and 06/13 in the amount of $511,312.70" for a stated total of $1,631,721.95. The chair reported the finance committee recommended approval; the motion to approve consideration of claims was made by Councilwoman Karen Johnson and seconded by Councilman Kyle Larson and passed on voice vote.

Questions from council: Councilwoman Karen Johnson asked whether the city would continue using a third‑party vendor, JDC Services, for peace‑officer background investigations or return those checks to in‑house staff. "Are we gonna continue using our services for a long period of time, or is this a permanent thing, or was it a temporary thing?" Johnson asked during the finance committee meeting.

A staff speaker explained that statutory and regulatory standards for peace‑officer backgrounds require prescribed minimums and that the city had previously performed those investigations in‑house. The staff account said the city began using a third party about a year ago because detectives were taking weeks to complete background checks while managing caseloads; in some cases a review could take "as long as a month, sometimes longer," which delayed hiring. The staff account said the city reduced detective staffing from three to two and that a third‑party vendor also offered confidentiality benefits for applicants. The staff recommendation was to continue with the third‑party provider for now but to reexamine the policy; no formal policy change was made.

Animal care costs: Johnson also asked about purchases to care for animals the city is holding because the contracted shelter ("Paws") is at capacity. A city speaker said the city had acquired temporary kennels and supplies to maintain animals until Paws could accept them and emphasized that "anything that we, any expenses we incur, such as the temporary kennels, those will remain property of the city." The speaker added the city is "carefully monitoring what we take in" and coordinating with Paws to transfer animals as openings become available; the council requested staff return with parameters for ongoing spending if needed.

Consent‑agenda note: During the subsequent consent‑agenda vote, Councilman Mike Bailey stated he would abstain from any line item that referenced Bailey Enterprises.

Decision vs. discussion: The council formally approved consideration of claims; the background‑check vendor policy and any spending limits for animal care remained discussion items with staff directed to reexamine vendor use and to continue coordinating with the contracted shelter. No additional formal direction or ordinance was adopted on either item on June 17.

Ending: The finance committee recommendation and council approval moved the payment process forward; council members asked staff to come back with additional information on background‑check options and with proposed spending limits or guidance related to interim animal care.