Commissioners table award of animal shelter RFP to SoFetch Safe Haven amid cost and facilities concerns

Ellis County Commissioners Court voted to table consideration of an award for animal sheltering and maintenance services after extended public comment and staff discussion about cost, facility access, and budget implications.

The RFP (2025‑0555) had one proposal from SoFetch Safe Haven proposing services for up to 150 animals per month at a not‑to‑exceed monthly cost of $172,500 (approximately $1,150 per animal depending on final negotiations). County staff and commissioners raised concerns about the proposal’s scale, whether the county has the facility needed if the county awards a contract, and the lack of budgeted appropriations for the higher cost scenarios described by the proposer.

SoFetch’s offer and public comment Purchasing staff reported one response to the RFP from SoFetch Safe Haven; staff noted the existing contract with SBCA was expiring that day. SoFetch representatives, including Lacey Menendez, described the components of their pro forma and said their per‑animal pricing covered medical vetting, spay/neuter, vaccinations and other expected costs. “We’ve outlined everything as best that we can,” Menendez said, summarizing the line‑item approach included in the RFP response. She stated SoFetch was negotiating a lease for a facility formerly used by the SPCA and planned to deploy staff and portable kennels while expanding capacity and using its national transport and partner network to place animals.

County concerns: budget, facility, and intake projections County budget staff said the full scale the proposer used for pricing (150 animals/month) would equate to roughly $2.1 million annually and that the county had not appropriated those funds; staff estimated a prorated remainder of the current budget year could be on the order of $950,000 if the higher intake scenario occurred. The county reported current intake numbers (without the nuisance ordinance) of about 20 animals per month and noted that reinstating the nuisance ordinance would likely increase intakes sharply.

Several commissioners and the court’s purchasing officer asked whether SoFetch had an executed lease for the SPCA facility; Menendez said negotiations were underway and she expected a signed lease by the end of the week but acknowledged the county would need to evaluate facility capacity, kennel space and quarantine requirements before finalizing an award. The sheriff’s office confirmed its statutory obligations for rabies quarantine and dangerous animal handling would continue regardless of the court’s decision.

Court action Given outstanding questions over facilities, precise monthly and per‑animal costs, and the lack of budget appropriation for the high‑volume scenario, the court voted unanimously to table the award and directed staff to bring the item back at the next regular meeting in two weeks. The court discussed the possibility of a short‑term contract (for example, five months through October) or a per‑animal payment model that would allow SoFetch to ramp operations based on actual intake.

Why it matters The county must maintain statutorily required responses for rabies quarantine and certain dangerous animal incidents; any outsourced sheltering services carry material budgetary and operational implications if intake numbers increase. Tabling the award gives the vendor time to finalize a lease and the court time to assess costs and potential regional cost‑sharing with municipalities that previously participated under the SBCA contract.

Next steps The item was tabled; staff will return to the Commissioners Court at the next meeting (two weeks) with updated information about facility lease status, a refined budget/pro forma, and recommended contract terms for a potential limited‑duration agreement.