Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Shelter topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and rescue groups press Moore County commissioners over shelter practices and transparency
Summary
Multiple residents and rescue organizations told the Moore County Board of Commissioners the county shelter has high euthanasia rates, poor communication with rescues and inconsistent reporting; speakers urged restoring volunteer programs, publishing shelter staff information and considering civilian management of animal services.
Speakers at the Moore County Board of Commissioners’ Jan. 6 meeting urged the board to address what they described as systemic problems at the county animal shelter, including high euthanasia rates, lapses in public reporting and broken lines of communication with rescue organizations.
Sarah Monzillo, a volunteer with Rogue Active Duty Animal Rescue, told the board her group has worked with the county since 2019 but said communication with shelter staff has become “nearly contentious.” She recounted rescuers’ repeated requests for the county to hold animals while foster resources were secured and described a dog named Aspen whom rescuers say was scheduled for euthanasia after a 72-hour stray hold before the group could arrange foster care.
Clayton Corley, another volunteer, read a February 2024 email from Best Friends Animal Society offering a free assessment and national technical assistance. The email, Corley said, flagged the county’s intake and outcome reporting as inconsistent with industry norms and offered in-person evaluation and program support at no cost to the county.
Deborah Wilson, speaking for Animal Advocates of Moore County, said the sheriff’s department and animal-services managers told advocates they would provide the Department of Agriculture shelter report for 2025 by the March 1 deadline and acknowledged misclassifications in owner-surrender data. Wilson urged the county to publish staff directories and program descriptions on the county website, reinstate volunteer and foster programs, and revisit lost-and-found protocols.
Bill Hammond cited figures he said came from the county dashboard, saying the shelter’s euthanasia rate was 59% in 2024 and 52% through Nov. 25, and that about 1,200 animals were euthanized in 2024. Hammond asked how sick and injured animals are being treated in the absence of on-site veterinary staff and questioned underused budget lines he said left professional-services funds unspent.
Amy Ference of Moore Animal Alliance urged the board to explore moving animal control out of the sheriff’s office and under civilian shelter-management expertise, saying counties that use dedicated animal-services professionals achieve better outcomes. “Animals die who didn't need to die,” Ference said, and asked the board to place the issue on a future agenda for research and discussion.
Not all public commenters agreed. Sherry Vredenberg said officers take animals to outside veterinarians, help seniors who cannot transport animals and that removing animal control from the sheriff’s department could create burdens for residents.
Chairman Picerno and other commissioners acknowledged a meeting held the prior day between commissioners, sheriff’s department staff and advocates and said some items were discussed; the sheriff’s office, according to speakers in the public comment period, has pledged to correct reporting errors. No formal board vote altering the structure of animal services occurred at the meeting.
What happens next: advocates asked the board to put the question of organizational structure and management of animal services on a future agenda for research and possible action. The board did not set a date for that discussion during the Jan. 6 meeting.
