Multnomah County officials outline needs, site options and $55–$70 million estimate for new animal services facility

Multnomah County Chair Vega Peterson and county staff on Monday presented the Board of Commissioners with conceptual designs, program needs and preliminary funding options for a proposed replacement of Multnomah County Animal Services (MCAS), saying the present facility prevents the county from meeting industry standards and community access goals.

County officials said a new facility would include distinct public lobbies, expanded clinic and surgical space, separate isolation areas for multiple species and program support spaces. A conceptual program developed during preliminary planning showed a minimal program of about 35,000 square feet and a more ideal program close to 45,000 square feet; an independent estimator produced a very rough cost range of $55 million to $70 million in today’s dollars.

Why it matters: Animal services is the county’s municipal shelter and animal control agency. County leaders said the current building constrains veterinary care, quarantine capacity and equitable public access — outcomes that affect public health, reunification of lost pets with owners and the county’s ability to deliver progressive humane-law enforcement and community outreach.

“We are the county’s sole municipal animal shelter and animal control agency,” Erin Grahick, division director for Multnomah County Animal Services, told the board. “MCAS cares for the community’s lost, homeless, stray, injured, sick, neglected, and abandoned animals.” Grahick said MCAS has reviewed the Association of Shelter Veterinarians guidelines and that the present facility does not allow the agency to meet several “must have” and some “unacceptable” conditions the guidelines identify.

Program gaps and design priorities

County staff reviewed nine program areas and described how each would change in a new building. Examples cited: - Public/nonhousing space: conceptual program about 6,200 square feet with separate lobbies for adoption and admissions and a large multifunctional training room; current public area is about 800 square feet with a single undersized lobby. - Dog housing: conceptual program about 10,500 square feet to allow separation of intake, observation, legal holds and enrichment; current program about 5,576 square feet. - Isolation housing: conceptual program about 1,500 square feet to support quarantine of multiple species and diseases; current isolation is about 70 square feet and cannot support dogs or multiple disease quarantines. - Shelter medicine and surgery: conceptual program about 4,200 square feet; current hospital space is under 900 square feet, with one surgical table and some equipment located outside the clinic area.

Staff said the current building forces use of spaces unsuitable for animal housing, creates cramped surgical and medical areas, and lacks storage and staff support spaces needed for infection control and humane operations. Grahick also cited community feedback that the current site has limited transit access, steep approaches and no nearby bus stop — problems the agency said disproportionately affect lower‑income residents trying to reclaim lost pets.

Estimates, options and next steps

Dan Zalko, division director for Facilities and Property Management, said planning work began in 2007 and has continued through design programming with architects who specialize in animal care facilities. Zalko said site sketches assumed a minimum of about four acres for a new facility and that staff evaluated both a new site and phased renovation/expansion of the existing site; at the conceptual level, the cost difference between a new site and renovating the existing site did not appear large because phasing and temporary relocation raise renovation costs.

Chief Financial Officer Eric Cardiano presented preliminary financing scenarios and said the project team has about $350,000,0.0 set aside from proceeds of a prior county resolution for early planning (amount as stated in the presentation; transcript included an unclear numeric string). Cardiano said that amount should carry planning and design work in the near term but that additional funding and likely debt issuance would be needed to build the facility if the board directs work to continue at the current pace.

Funding options discussed included full‑faith‑and‑credit bonds (no voter approval required but subject to county debt‑policy limits), general obligation bonds (voter approved), interfund loans, grants, one‑time general fund contributions and donations. Cardiano presented example debt scenarios and noted that every increase in non‑debt funding reduces total interest costs; the project team will continue refining a funding strategy as design and site decisions are made.

“Because this is just a conceptual estimate there is a lot of contingency in here,” Zalko told the board in response to a question about per‑square‑foot costs. He said the estimate includes high early contingencies and that the county will obtain more precise cost estimates during design and procurement.

Board comments and timeline

Commissioners expressed support for a new facility while pressing for clearer cost and phasing comparisons between renovating the current site and building new. Commissioner Moyer said the estimated per‑square‑foot cost felt high compared with market experience and asked the team to refine estimates during the design procurement. Commissioner Singleton asked that site analysis and the timing of the FAC‑1 administrative step be aligned; staff said the county intends to return to the board in March to seek approval to proceed with formal design procurements while siting analysis continues.

Staff said the project team has begun a site analysis, has convened an executive stakeholder committee and plans to return to the board for a FAC‑1 approval in March (date to be finalized) to begin formal design procurement and to present refined funding options and siting criteria.

Ending: Staff cautioned that the project is at a conceptual phase: major uncertainties remain around location, final square footage and definitive cost, and the county will continue community engagement and refine program, schedule and funding as procurement and design advance.