Council presses shelter contractor over late, unclear animal-control reports

Councilman Horner pressed for more timely and accurate animal-control reporting at the Jan. 13 Fremont City Council meeting, saying the city has repeatedly received late or inconsistent reports from Forever Homes, the nonprofit contractor that houses impounded animals.

Jodie Sanders, city administrator, told the council the October report from Forever Homes had been provided but that the contractor is "running behind" in delivering balanced, month-to-month reports. Sanders invited questions and said staff would take them.

Horner said the city ordinance and the contract require reliable reporting and asked for clearer explanations when animals remain at the shelter for extended periods. "These reports come in either late or they're inaccurate," he said, and council members need to know whether animals are in city custody or being held by the shelter for reasons related to its no-kill mission or pending legal matters.

During the discussion, council members noted that Forever Homes is a non-kill shelter and that its mission can result in animals staying in care long after initial intake. One council member warned that finding the contractor in breach of contract for reporting failures would carry operational consequences—potentially returning impound responsibilities to the city—but other members cautioned that pursuing breach was premature without clearer data.

Councilwoman Ganon, a member of the animal-control committee, said legal staff is reviewing the reporting format and that the committee intends to provide a delineated report clarifying which animals the city directly holds and which are shelter-managed under extended circumstances. "Sometimes we hold those animals for weeks because we're required to do that," she said, noting the shelter's role and the difficulty posed by long-term sheltering.

Councilman Jensen suggested the city obtain records from whichever city unit (for example, police) handles pickups so the council can see a separate accounting of animals the city placed into custody. Councilman Vaughn said residents are passionate about animal welfare and that receiving an October report in January undermines confidence: "It just kind of gives that vibe that potentially something is a miss or just not quite fully sorted."

With no public comments, Councilman Jensen moved to receive the animal-control report; Councilman Horner seconded and the motion carried 7–0. The council directed staff and the animal-control committee to work with legal counsel to produce a clearer report that separates city custody records from broader shelter intake and retention data.

The council did not adopt any enforcement action at the meeting; next steps are expected to include committee and legal review and a revised reporting format to be presented to the council.