Kankakee committee delays decision on county animal-control contract after questions on fees and patrols

The Building and Code Safety Committee of Kankakee City on June, 2025 did not take action on a proposed animal-control contract with Kankakee County after members said key questions about fees, patrols and enforcement remained unanswered.

Committee members said the city currently pays roughly $2,001.90 per month for county animal-control services and were told the new contract would increase costs by about $10,000, but they did not have detailed billing figures or a reconciliation showing how owner-paid fees would be reflected in the city’s accounts. Aldermen pressed for clarity on whether routine return-to-owner (RTO) charges and after-hours fees would be billed to pet owners or absorbed by the city.

Members asked several procedural and legal questions about the county contract, including who mails reclamation notices, whether the seven-day reclamation clock is measured from mailing or receipt, whether an adoption fee exists under the proposed terms, and where patrols would occur inside the municipality. The draft contract language gives the county animal-control department the option to issue both county code and municipal ordinance citations; the committee was told those citations would be prosecuted through the "20 first judicial district in Kankakee County," per the contract text provided to the committee.

Committee members said the draft did not show the city’s fee on the paperwork returned to owners, and they asked why the county would not include the city fee in its paperwork so owners could pay both amounts when retrieving animals. Members also noted examples in the county billing showing $50 RTO charges and $100 for after-hours returns, which “adds up pretty quick” when repeated for habitual incidents.

The group said they still needed a clearer cost breakdown showing how much the county currently collects from pet owners for pick-up and reclamation and how much the city ultimately pays on its monthly invoice. One committee member recalled that Elizabeth Kubal had been expected to bring detailed numbers at a prior meeting; members reiterated that those figures were still outstanding.

The committee also discussed who the animal-control officer would report to and noted a recent job posting listing a starting hourly wage of $16 for the county animal-control officer position. Committee members requested copies of the full contract and the county fee schedule for review.

No motion to approve the contract was made. Members agreed they were not in a position to take action at the meeting and left the item on "old business." The committee chair said the mayor or senior manager would follow up and the item may be returned to committee or forwarded to full council when the requested information is available.

Why it matters: The contract would change how animal calls, fees and citations are handled in Kankakee City and could increase municipal costs; members said they needed clearer billing and operational language before authorizing a multi-thousand-dollar contract.

Next steps: Committee members asked staff to provide the contract file and the missing fee/revenue detail and said they expect follow-up from the mayor’s office before the matter reaches full City Council.