Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears proposal to add microchipping fee to animal‑control schedule; staff seeks to speed returns
Summary
City animal‑control staff recommended adding dog microchipping to the fee schedule so more impounded animals can be returned quickly; staff proposed free or reduced fees for registered Leon Valley residents and higher fees for nonresidents and outlined operational details.
City staff proposed adding microchipping to the city’s animal‑control fee schedule at the June 3 meeting, saying the change would help return lost animals to owners faster and reduce sheltering costs.
Roke Salinas, the city’s executive director of animal and related services, said the city’s impound data show microchipped dogs get returned far faster than nonchipped dogs. "Since January of 2024, the city's impounded 72 dogs. Only 29% of those were chipped," Salinas said, adding that chipped dogs were returned to owners much more quickly. He told council impounded dogs without chips averaged about 21 days in city custody, versus about 1.5 days for chipped dogs.
Staff proposed adding a microchipping service and fee schedule to the city’s ordinance. Salinas described the draft fees as: free microchips for Leon Valley residents who have an active city dog registration, nominal fees such as $5 for altered dogs and $15 for intact dogs in some circumstances, and a $20 charge for non‑Leon Valley residents. He said the city would supply the implant and staff would perform the procedure; the registration and a separate online database record would be required so the chip links to owner contact information.
Salinas said the service would be limited per household consistent with existing licensing caps and that staff can perform microchipping on animals the city picks up or for residents by appointment. He noted comparable jurisdictions provide microchipping and that the proposed fees are intended to offset cost without creating a profit center.
Council did not vote; Salinas asked for direction to place the ordinance amendment on the next consent agenda if council wishes to move forward. Staff said the item was a first read and would return for formal action after any council direction.
