Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Yucaipa council keeps county animal-control contract for a year while exploring alternatives
Loading...
Summary
Council directed staff to extend the county contract for animal care and control for one year while exploring options including an RFP, a municipal in-house program, or a joint powers authority; staff estimated the FY 26–27 contract amount at $592,342 with budgeted usage of about $375,000.
City staff presented the animal care and control contract the city currently holds with the County of San Bernardino’s Public Health Department and asked council whether to extend the one‑year agreement, issue an RFP, or pursue alternatives.
The staff report noted the contract amount for fiscal year 2026–27 would be $592,342 but that the city historically pays only for services used; staff estimated about 60% usage and recommended budgeting $375,000 for FY 26–27 if the contract is extended. The contract includes a 3% annual adjustment and one remaining extension option.
Public commenter Kelly Moylan urged the council to provide animal-control services in-house, citing delayed county responses and lower projected local costs. "I don't feel like we should be spending money with San Bernardino County. I feel like we should be doing this in house," Moylan said, and offered to assist with insurance and procurement leads.
City Manager and council members flagged logistical and cost questions for an in‑house program, including kennels, vehicles and staffing. One council member noted unique rural service challenges in Yucaipa — large animals such as emus or horses that require special equipment — and cautioned that municipal operation could be costlier than contracting.
City staff recommended keeping the county contract on the "back burner" as a fallback while exploring joint efforts with neighboring cities and potential JPA arrangements. Deputy Mayor Bieber moved to approve a one-year extension of the county contract and to direct staff to research joint-powers or other alternatives for longer-term service delivery; the motion was seconded and approved by voice vote.
Next steps: Council directed staff to return with a contract extension for FY 26–27 and requested a staff report on potential JPAs, in‑house options, or other shared arrangements for consideration in the upcoming budget process.
Attribution: Public comments and quotes are attributed to Kelly Moylan; staff analysis and motions are attributed to City staff and council members as recorded.
