The San Diego Humane Society has issued a warning to the city of San Diego, stating that it may cease providing animal control services unless the city agrees to a budget adjustment closer to $1 million, which aligns with its long-term service contract.
Mayor Todd Gloria had previously aimed to negotiate a compromise by scaling back a proposed cut of $3.5 million from the city’s annual payment to the Humane Society to $1.5 million, reducing the total owed from $18.2 million.
However, officials from the Humane Society have firmly stated that any reduction exceeding $1 million is unacceptable, potentially leading the nonprofit to withdraw their services from the city.
“We’ve been very clear from the beginning of these discussions that the financial hit we could withstand and continue providing services was $1 million,” said Juliana Tetlow, the organization’s government relations specialist, during a recent city budget hearing.
While the Humane Society expresses understanding of the city’s ongoing budget crisis, Tetlow emphasizes that they cannot risk their own financial stability beyond the $1 million concession.
“If we are put in a position to choose between helping the city with their budget deficit or ensuring we can be there for the animals in the future, our duty is to the animals,” she stated. “The San Diego Humane Society was founded to take care of animals, not the city.”
The contract with the city encompasses various critical services, including sheltering stray, injured, or lost animals, reuniting lost pets with their owners, managing animal adoptions, and overseeing the city’s dog licensing program. Additionally, the agreement gives the nonprofit’s law-enforcement officers authority to enforce local leash laws and investigate cases of animal abuse, neglect, and cruelty.
In April, Mayor Gloria proposed a substantial budget cut of $3.5 million for the new fiscal year beginning on July 1, an amount based on a city-wide initiative seeking to reduce expenses by 20%.
Following public feedback, he revised the proposed cut to $1.5 million, also allocating $1 million for roof repairs on the Humane Society’s city-owned facility in Linda Vista.
Tetlow, however, contends that this $1 million allocation for roof repairs is insufficient, as the city is already contractually obligated to fulfill such maintenance tasks.
While the Mayor frames the proposed reduction as $1.5 million, Tetlow argues that the actual cut is closer to $2 million, insisting that any funding reduction must be limited to $1 million.
Her remarks highlighted the significant consequences that termination of the contract would impose on low-income communities in San Diego.
“We are a safety net for residents who need help keeping their pets and those who need compassion and understanding and a safe landing place when they can no longer care for their animals,” Tetlow stated.
She warned that if the city pressures the Humane Society to the point of terminating the contract due to lack of funding, it would adversely affect under-resourced communities throughout the city.
In light of the increased costs charged by the Humane Society since assuming animal control responsibilities in 2018, city officials have considered managing those services internally.
According to a 2022 analysis, the city’s annual costs for performing its own animal control services could potentially decrease by approximately $1 million. Nevertheless, this transition would require an initial investment of $17.2 million for necessary setup expenses, including the purchase of vehicles, securing a facility for animal housing, and hiring and training staff, including veterinarians and animal control officers.
Timing poses another challenge; Tetlow indicated the Humane Society would not allow any grace period if the contract is canceled next month.
Councilmember Kent Lee expressed disbelief at the situation, questioning the possibility of ending animal control services.
“It just blows my mind,” said Lee, addressing Gloria’s staff during a recent budget hearing. “Are we looking to possibly end those services? And what would the alternative be if we do?”
Parks Director Andy Field, who manages contract negotiations, remains hopeful about reaching an agreement soon. He mentioned ongoing discussions could lead to a solution, potentially involving the Humane Society increasing certain fees charged to the public.
Tetlow has voiced frustrations over some recent private meetings with individual City Council members who have allegedly suggested leveraging the Humane Society’s fundraising success against it.
“It’s been distressing to hear, ‘If the San Diego Humane Society already fundraises $10 million to support excellence in performing state-mandated services, what’s another million or two?’” she commented.
While acknowledging the nonprofit’s substantial asset holdings, Tetlow clarified that accessible liquid assets available to manage a contract shortfall are more limited and are earmarked for emergencies rather than to compensate for the city’s budgetary deficits.
The existing contract stipulates that the city is responsible for certain tasks, such as dead animal pickups and responding to barking dog complaints, which fall under the Environmental Services Department and code enforcement, respectively.
Renegotiation opportunities are limited according to the contract, allowing for discussions only in 2026 and 2030, contingent upon mutual agreement from both parties.
image source from：https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2025/05/21/as-san-diego-seeks-cuts-to-stem-budget-woes-humane-society-threatens-to-stop-providing-animal-control/
