El Paso residents press council over animal services practices, call for audit and spay‑neuter drive

Dozens of El Paso residents told city leaders on Aug. 5 that El Paso Animal Services is failing animals and the people who try to help them, describing repeated instances of injured animals being left waiting, animals returned to the street and a shelter system strained by rising intake.

Speakers at the city council’s public‑comment period said the shelter’s “managed intake” policy and other protocols were forcing Good Samaritans to either care for injured animals themselves or place animals back where they were found. “Residents who find animals and attempt to have them picked up or turn them in at the facility are told to leave or take back to where found because shelter is full,” said Darlene Rincon, a rescue volunteer, describing the practice as “heartbreaking but unacceptable.”

The testimony came from a long line of rescue volunteers, foster parents and nonprofit leaders who used the council podium to outline problems they said are widespread: delayed triage of injured animals, animals left in cardboard boxes in the parking lot while convulsing, refusal of intake when the shelter is said to be full, and animals released without spay/neuter that later reproduce on the streets.

“The dog was left convulsing in the parking lot and was denied urgently necessary care repeatedly,” said Barbara Valencia, who described a recent incident in which a finder waited for 90 minutes as a dog seized. “This is inhumane and animal cruelty at the hands of the department whose job is to assist the stray sick and injured animals in our community.”

Others pressed for structural fixes and more prevention funding. Elena Perez, founder of the Paws of Promise rescue, said the community is “flooded daily with calls about strays, injured, or dumped animals” and urged enforcement of existing cruelty laws, an audit of shelter operations, mandatory emergency‑care training, a transparent intake policy that welcomes — not turns away — found animals, and “a real investment in infrastructure, staffing, and accountability.”

Speakers cited recent shelter statistics and trends during the remarks. A volunteer noted that animal services handled roughly 15,405 intakes in 2023 and about 20,000 in late 2024, and said January 2025 intake alone was about 1,700 animals. Several volunteers cited a live‑release rate of roughly 75 to 76 percent in recent months; speakers used that figure to explain why many animals are nevertheless being euthanized or warehoused because of overcrowding.

Critics singled out “managed intake” policies introduced after 2019 and urged immediate changes. “Managed intake is illegal in the state of Texas, 826.033,” said Ron Como, referencing the statute in his remarks, and called for the full use of a West‑Side facility the city had purchased to relieve overcrowding.

Several speakers criticized the shelter’s leadership and called for an external audit and a change in management. “This is not an attack against the hardworking staff and volunteers at the shelter, rather it is the 1 at the helm that needs to be held accountable and removed immediately,” Valencia said. Others asked for immediate increases in spay‑and‑neuter programs and low‑cost clinics, and for the city to partner with local rescue groups rather than relying on volunteers to fill system gaps.

Not all testimony was critical. Aileen Mendoza, a volunteer who runs the Rescue Runners program, urged the council to recognize the shelter staff’s workload. “As a volunteer, I see what they go through day in and day out as the animals continue to flow in with most times nowhere to put them,” she said, and asked the council to pair accountability with support.

Mayor Renard Johnson acknowledged the speakers after the public comment period and said the council had heard their concerns. “We heard you today,” the mayor told the room, and added that the council and staff would work on next steps.

No formal council action on animal services was taken during the Aug. 5 meeting; council members, staff and speakers said they expected follow‑up briefings and additional discussion of audits, protocols and funding at subsequent meetings.

Ending note: Residents asked the council for several near‑term items including (1) an independent audit of Animal Services’ intake and triage protocols, (2) funding and expansion of spay/neuter clinics, and (3) greater transparency about shelter capacity and how found animals are handled. City staff and council members committed to follow up publicly on next steps.