Page County board approves working group on animal-control MOU and funds sheriff compensation

Page County supervisors opened a broad debate on animal-control operations on Oct. 7, splitting over a proposed interlocal memorandum of understanding that would assign towns a pro‑rata share of animal-control costs and a separate request to compensate the sheriff for running animal-control services.

County staff presented a draft MOU that used 2023 call counts to illustrate a combined town reimbursement example of $15,000, which would have been allocated pro rata (for example, Town of Stanley roughly $2,550; Luray about $8,250; Shenandoah about $4,050 under the illustration). Staff said the MOU would define standard service hours, routine versus emergency responses, and town obligations for emergency veterinary costs when town deputies respond within town limits.

Representatives from the three towns objected to the reimbursement provision. Charles Jenkins, Shenandoah’s town manager, told the board his council opposed signing the MOU as written, saying the town already provides extensive assist services to county units and should not pay an extra fee. Terry Pettit, Town Manager of Stanley, raised budget concerns and noted the per‑call charge could fluctuate year to year; he said small towns could not readily absorb an unbudgeted, variable charge. Brian Chrisman, town manager for Lorraine, urged the board to convene a work group with one representative from each town and county staff to negotiate terms and suggested removing direct reimbursement from the MOU as drafted.

The sheriff explained that operating animal control has been an uncompensated additional responsibility in prior years and characterized the $12,000 figure as compensation for duties and liability rather than a raise. County staff and supervisors discussed enforcement boundaries, the difference between criminal matters (which would remain law-enforcement responses) and routine animal control, and the need for certified animal-control officers.

The board moved to form a committee of county and town representatives to update the MOUs and to begin redrafting the agreement with clearer definitions of routine and emergency responses. Separately, the board approved $12,000 in compensation for the sheriff and directed staff to identify board-reserve funding as the likely source. The working group was to start promptly so a revised MOU could be in place before the automatic renewal window in July.

The board’s actions do not finalize how future emergency veterinary costs, out‑of‑county visitor incidents, or the exact fee formulas will be handled; the working group and any redrafted MOU will need to resolve those details. The transcript shows robust town opposition to direct reimbursements as drafted and consistent board interest in defining roles, training certification, and operational staffing before implementing a cost‑sharing arrangement.