Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Welfare Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident alleges shelter mismanagement and mass euthanasia after contract with out‑of‑state rescue; sheriff says claims 'inaccurate'
Summary
A resident told the Daviess County Fiscal Court on Oct. 23 that operations deteriorated after the county contracted with It Takes a Village Rescue on April 1, 2025, alleging overcrowding, falling adoptions and directives to mass euthanize animals; the sheriff said parts of her account were 'really inaccurate' and declined to discuss personnel publicly.
Get email alerts on the Animal Welfare Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Beverly Johnson told the Daviess County Fiscal Court on Oct. 23 that the county’s transfer of animal-care responsibilities to It Takes a Village Rescue, based in Evansville, Indiana, on April 1, 2025, has been "a disaster," and that shelter operations have deteriorated since the contract took effect.
Johnson told the court she believes the rescue cannot manage the county’s intake — she said the county takes in "over 3,000 animals a year" and alleged the shelter is overcrowded, adoptions have fallen, and staff and community support have eroded. She said an animal-control officer resigned rather than participate in what she described as mass euthanasia and asserted the county had "undone a decade of progress in animal welfare." She addressed the presiding official directly, saying, "Judge Kaslan, this is your legacy."
Sheriff's Office leadership was invited to respond. The sheriff told the court he would speak to the commenter privately because he believed "a lot of what she just said is really inaccurate," and he declined to comment on personnel matters publicly, saying he needed more information about the resignations and other claims before discussing them in open session.
The transcript records no formal action, investigation timeline, or staff report scheduled in the meeting minutes to address the allegations. The court did not vote on or otherwise direct a public investigation during the Oct. 23 session. The sheriff and county staff indicated they will follow up outside the public meeting; the record does not show the outcome of any follow-up as of the meeting’s close.

