-
(ARCHIVE PHOTO | THE GRAHAM LEADER) A dog looks at visitors from behind a gate at the Humane Society of Young County. The city of Graham and Young County may be considering alternative options to house animals other than HSYC.
The city of Graham and Young County may be considering alternative options to house animals — a move that could jeopardize longstanding partnerships with the Humane Society of Young County.
HSYC is a nonprofit organization that receives funding from the city of Graham, city of Newcastle, city of Olney and Young County under different contracts for the housing of animals.
Within the last year, the organization reached out to both the city of Graham and Young County regarding raising their funding amounts.
Young County Judge Win Graham said Monday, Aug. 18, that both HSYC and the Young County Sheriff’s Office met to find common ground from previous grievances, but ultimately he decided to research other options.
“I have also talked to the city of Graham about the idea of, why don’t we do our own animal shelter,” Graham said Aug. 18. “Surely the city has some land that we could build a shelter that would be just for county animals, city animals. …It wouldn’t be a open to the public thing.”
The county and HSYC currently operate under a contract which was signed in 2018. No revised contract options were presented by the county before they adopted their budget last week.
The city of Graham has had ongoing negotiations with HSYC, with multiple contracts having been submitted by both parties since June, but none accepted. City Manager Eric Garretty signaled that he has also been considering other animal housing options during an early August meeting.
“This is a partnership that isn’t working, and at least in its current state, I believe it’s been irreparably harmed,” Garretty said Aug. 7. “So in terms of where we go from here, staff would like to present to the council in the near future some options for other ways to take care of the sheltering portion of animal care.”
The city manager said Friday, Aug. 29 that while he has not received direction from city council on alternate options as they await another contract from HSYC, they are always looking for ways the city and county can work together.
The city manager also stated he discussed short-term options with the council if the city wanted to house its animals on a temporary basis at another facility or at a non-permanent local facility.
The judge suggested the county continue speaking with the city about a potential plan to move away from housing animals at HSYC, also including the possibility of including the city of Olney and participation from other counties.
“I think the city is in the same boat that we are, that they are very frustrated and they just can’t seem to find common ground,” Graham said. “My understanding is that Jack County is having similar problems, too. Maybe not getting them as a permanent member, but they might pay a membership or something for overflow or even you just charge them on a per animal basis or something.”
The justification for the city and county seeking to break away from HSYC has not been clear.
Alleged incidents with HSYC have been brought up by both the city and county, with little to no information on specifics being given in public meetings.
HSYC was in attendance during a June 16 meeting, where the county made vague statements about potential incidents where an animal was turned away. The judge stated that it had happened twice since he had been on the court, but offered no further clarification.
But, the current director pushed back on the claims made by the judge.
“I’ve never given a hard no, never to the county. It is in our contract that we can but I haven’t,” HSYC Director Shelby Brogdon said.
The remainder of the meeting with the county became an intermittent guessing game on what was being alleged, with HSYC members attempting to identify which potential animals may have been turned away. The incidents were never clarified.
The county also brought up a previously strained relationship with the sheriff’s office. During the meeting, Chief Deputy Chris Moody stated he was willing to meet with HSYC to start rebuilding the relationship.
The city manager also alluded to issues related to customers that deal with HSYC and would not discuss additional details in an open forum.
“There have been multiple issues related to the customers who deal with the humane society that probably are not appropriate for discussion in an open meeting, but I would be happy to discuss them with (council members) one on one,” Garretty said.
Both the city and county had requested membership on the HSYC board, but the board denied both requests, stating it went against the organization’s bylaws regarding board membership.
According to the shelter’s bylaws, board members are required to donate at least $100 per month and/or donate needed items or volunteer their time at the shelter each month.
The city first requested the Animal Control Officer serve as a nonvoting member of the board and then later revised their contract, making it contingent upon the ACO serving as a voting member. It is unclear what level of HSYC board membership the county was seeking.
Both the city and the county chose to keep their funding for HSYC the same as previous years at $32,000 and $20,000 respectively. Negotiations with the city and HSYC are ongoing.
