City sets special-called meeting to discuss animal care services

As contract negotiations between the city of Graham and Humane Society of Young County continue to break down, a meeting has been set to consider staying with the organization or moving to another option for animal care services.

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.

A special-called meeting was set by the Graham City Council for 6 p.m. Tuesday, Oct. 7 with all city council members, with the exception of Jack Little, voting to hold the meeting.

“City council has worked diligently to consider options for animal care services during this fiscal year,” City Manager Eric Garretty said. “The mayor and city manager held a negotiating meeting with the Young County Humane Society, and as a result of that meeting, the humane society submitted a counter proposal. The counter proposal does not align with some of the council priorities, as expressed by the mayor during the negotiation meeting.”

The special-called meeting agenda states it will move from a public forum immediately into executive session for the city to consult their attorney regarding the provision of animal care services. 

“You will need to have an executive session for the attorney to review with you what you can do and can’t do in the contract, that type of thing. So you’ll have an executive session to open, have the good information from the city attorney about any legal issues related to it and then come back out into open session to make a decision,” Garretty said. 

Following the executive session will be several options for the city council to choose on how to move forward.

The first option will be to consider and execute an agreement between the city and HSYC for animal care services. Immediately after this agenda item is one to consider designating a subcommittee to negotiate a service agreement between the city and HSYC for animal care services.

Following those three items are two considerations for the city council to move away from HSYC. 

The first item is to consider authorizing the city manager to negotiate an interlocal agreement for animal holding services between the city of Graham and the city of Jacksboro. 

The second item is to consider directing the city manager to create a capital project for the initial construction and ongoing operation of an animal holding facility and appropriate $43,000 from the general fund for the project––the amount requested by HSYC in their most recent contract.

The city council spoke about setting the date during their regular meeting Thursday, Sept. 25. 

The new contract submitted to council for the Thursday meeting came after the negotiation meeting between the city and HSYC. 

Garretty said during the previous negotiations there was no consensus on the fee paid to HSYC and debate regarding adding the Animal Control Officer as a voting member of the HSYC nonprofit board.

The city manager urged the council to set the special-called meeting to discuss animal care services for the city.

“The humane society said they would like to continue services only through November. …The attorney wrote me late yesterday. It’s not necessarily a hard and fast deadline. They would like to continue the negotiation process, but my recommendation to you is you need to have this at a special-called meeting in the evening and just talk about it and look at all your options,” Garretty said. 

The city council had some questions before they set a date, with council member Jeff Dickinson asking why the agenda item for the Thursday meeting was listed as setting a special-called meeting, with no further clarification as to what the meeting was about for the public.

“When I read the agenda (about setting) a special-called meeting, I didn’t know what that was about. I had to read further down,” Dickinson said. “I don’t think that was fair to the public. ...Usually, you’re really good about telling if it’s the water rates or zoning or whatever, but we didn’t list what the topic was, just for the public to know what the special-called meeting was for.” 

The city manager said it was the nearest date to the council meeting they could meet to adhere to notice requirements to notify the public of this meeting, but gave no clarification on why the agenda item was missing the discussion topic.

Council members Dickinson and Little asked why the topic would not be discussed as an agenda item during the next regular city council meeting instead of during a special-called meeting.

“Part of the reason why we are having to do this as a special-called meeting is to make sure we have our attorney available, because there were scheduling conflicts,” Mayor Alex Heartfield said. “We could’ve had it on this agenda and have it during the executive session of this agenda, but he was not available today to do a discussion.” 

The mayor said the topic needs to be addressed quickly and would have to happen either at a special-called meeting Tuesday, Oct. 7 or at a regular council meeting Thursday, Oct. 9. 

He added that there were “legal requirements” in the current contract that require some timing issues that make a later meeting date such as Thursday, Oct. 23 a concern.

Dickinson asked the mayor to clarify what those legal requirements were in the current contract that require the meeting to be earlier than the Thursday, Oct. 23 council meeting.

“There’s a 30-day period and another 30-day period in terms of getting notice and then negotiating periods and so if we wait too long to have this it could push us beyond that Nov. 30 date,” Heartfield said.

Both the city and Young County are considering alternative options for animal care services. Within the last year, HSYC reached out to both the city of Graham and Young County regarding raising their funding amounts.

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.

The city of Graham has had ongoing negotiations with HSYC, with multiple contracts having been submitted by both parties since June, but none accepted. 

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.”

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.

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.

Both the city and county 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 ACO 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.