Petaluma council moves toward ending North Bay Animal Services contract after extensive public outcry

Petaluma’s City Council, responding to weeks of negative coverage and more than two dozen public speakers at its March 2 meeting, directed staff to pursue an expedited transition away from the city’s current animal services contractor, North Bay Animal Services (NBAS), and to arrange interim shelter and field coverage while the city secures records and completes an assessment.

Assistant City Manager Brian Cochran told the council the city’s existing contract with NBAS covers sheltering and field services for $478,000 a year (about $40,000 per month), and staff had prepared three paths: (1) keep NBAS through July 31 and issue an RFP for a successor; (2) terminate NBAS on a date‑certain (an example date offered was March 31), temporarily close intakes while relocating animals and bring in an interim provider for weeks to months; or (3) terminate and permanently outsource sheltering to a different provider outside Petaluma. “Our goal is to provide a stable, humane, and responsive animal services system that the public can count on,” Cochran said.

Regional humane organizations described proposals and cost estimates. Sonoma County Animal Services offered field‑service coverage priced at roughly $360,000 a year (about $30,000 per month). The Humane Society of Sonoma County submitted a proposal estimating initial startup costs “about $200,000” and quarterly operating estimates in the $200,000–$300,000 range, with significant caveats because records and operational data are incomplete. Marin Humane also submitted an interim services proposal, staff said.

Speakers from local and regional rescue and veterinary organizations told the council they had found incomplete records and substantial care gaps at another NBAS site that had recently been taken over by county or regional providers. “These included nursing mothers with newborn puppies, unvaccinated puppies who later developed parvovirus, and severely emaciated adult dogs living in conditions unlike anything I’ve seen,” Carrie Stewart, senior director of operations at the Humane Society of Sonoma County, said in public comment. Cynthia King, HSSC’s executive director, said her board would not be comfortable “overlapping with North Bay as a provider” because NBAS had not demonstrated good faith cooperation with outside reviewers.

Numerous Petaluma residents and veterinary professionals told the council about foster‑to‑adopt breakdowns, dogs released without timely rabies vaccinations, missing or incoherent medical and licensing records, and cases they described as neglect. Council members cited those concerns in their deliberations and urged staff to take immediate steps to preserve records: “Whatever they are … we have the legal means we need,” the city attorney noted during the discussion.

Councilmembers coalesced around Option 2 — an immediate contractual termination and short interim closure assessed by regional providers. Several members said they wanted staff to: secure administrative access to NBAS records, pursue a third‑party forensic audit of finances and records, work with regional partners to ensure 24/7 field response during any shelter closure, clarify ownership of city assets at the facility, and return with a transition plan and budget implications. Councilmembers also discussed pausing or tailoring the RFP for a long‑term operator until the interim provider completes a forensic and operational assessment.

Staff warned that many elements remain unknown: the current shelter population was cited at about 68 animals on site with roughly 100 in foster care; transfer logistics, microchip and bite records, and medical histories will have to be reconciled; and interim staffing and capital upgrades could raise costs. Cochran said staff would aim to issue the RFP as previously planned if the council chose to keep NBAS through July, but if the council moved to an immediate termination staff would work with partners to attempt a rapid but careful transition. Councilmembers asked staff to return with precise budget impacts and a recommendation for short‑term contracting that minimizes risk to animals and to the public.

The council’s direction does not, in the transcript, record a final formal roll‑call vote to terminate the contract; instead, members voiced strong majority support for pursuing termination for cause with interim coverage, securing records, and commissioning a forensic audit. Staff will return to the council with the detailed plan, cost estimates, and any proposed contract actions.

What’s next: staff expects to secure records and work with regional partners on interim arrangements immediately, and to present an implementation plan and budget impacts to the council at follow‑up meetings.