Residents press San Bernardino council for changes at animal services after rising intake and euthanasia numbers

Multiple residents urged the San Bernardino City Council on Wednesday to overhaul the city’s animal services operations, citing a spike in intake and euthanasia and alleging enforcement and management failures.

During public comment, speakers including Lydia Savala, Georgia (last name not specified in the record) and Sharon Negrete described increasing animal intake and elevated euthanasia rates. "Since 2020 there has been a 53% increase in total animal intake... and a 287% increase in the euthanasia of animals," Lydia Savala said. Sharon Negrete told the council, "Hundreds of healthy animals... were murdered this week. This isn't a mistake. It's a consequence of your negligence."

Key concerns raised: Speakers faulted the department for not providing regular spay/neuter services and for not enforcing existing ordinances against breeding. Commenters said a mobile clinic vehicle is underused, questioned recent hiring and advertised positions for veterinarians, and criticized disposal and facility planning around quarantine and isolation areas. Several speakers called for immediate, aggressive enforcement of the city’s spay/neuter ordinance, a publicly funded spay/neuter program, new leadership in animal services and better transparency on spending.

City response and context: In the city manager update earlier in the meeting staff noted an increase in the city's share of the county’s homeless count and highlighted other items (fire station opening, microchip scanners at fire stations), but there was no formal staff presentation about animal services during the open session. Several residents asked the council to scrutinize the department’s budget — which commenters said increased from under $2 million in 2020 to about $11 million now — and to provide clearer reporting on expenditures and services.

What speakers requested: A sampling of requests included: immediate free spay/neuter citywide clinics, redirection of administrative overhead to front‑line care, activated mobile clinic deployment, enforcement against alleged backyard breeders, exploration of alternatives to rendering (cremation/contracting) and an investigation into leadership decisions. Several speakers said they support community‑run interventions and urged the council to hold management to account.

What’s next: These comments were part of the meeting’s public‑comment period; no action was taken at the meeting. Councilmembers did not make policy decisions on animal services at this session but public pressure indicates an expectation the council will direct staff to follow up.