Flagler County government is working toward consolidating animal control services with those of Palm Coast. That would sever part of the county’s $300,000 contract with the Flagler Humane Society, which currently provides those services to the county.
The Flagler County Commission and the Palm Coast City Council in a joint meeting on Wednesday did not make a decision to that end, but agreed by consensus to draft a joint agreement (or ILA, an interlocal agreement) that would define the scope and cost of the services Palm Coast would provide.
The direction is a reflection of the county’s unease with the Humane Society. It would not end either the county’s or the city’s contracts with the society for sheltering services. The two governments are also discussing plans to open a shelter independent of the Humane Society, but that’s over a horizon no one can yet see.
The county had been discussing contracting for animal services with Palm Coast for months, but with little hard data. Palm Coast Code Enforcement Manager Barbara Grossman, whose 27 employees include three animal control officers, provided that data at the joint meeting.
Palm Coast’s officers cover three zones in the city’s nearly 100 square miles. The estimated startup cost to provide county animal control services would be $529,000 in the first year, $377,000 in the second year, rising 5 percent every year after that, to $477,000 by 2031. The legal costs account for over $80,000 of that in the first year, which might be out of kilter with the county’s current legal costs. “The cost is quite minimal,” Deputy County Attorney Sean Moylan said. “We don’t have enough cases.”
Those numbers are based on hiring two animal control officers and an animal control technician, buying two vehicles that last about seven years each, plus additional overhead.
Based on Humane Society figures, between October 2024 and March 2025, there were 6,819 animals taken in by the society from Palm Coast for a half dozen reasons (surrendered, seized, strayed and so on), and just 1,063 were turned in from unincorporated Flagler County.
“It doesn’t seem two new animal control officers are needed,” Council member Theresa Pontieri said, if the county’s needs were added to the city’s. “I can see definitely one more,” plus a technician. If the numbers demand it, more staff could be added subsequently, she said.
The ILA would itemize the expenses, enabling the city to bill the county periodically. It would be actual costs–not a split of services, though the city is likely to have what officials called “residual” benefits from seeing its animal control division expand. For example, it might diminish the number of times its animal control officers would have to be on call.
“Personally I think the way to go is to have one animal control group, because it takes a lot of money, a lot of training, a lot of capability,” Council member Dave Sullivan said. The operation should include all the cities and the county, including Flagler Beach and Bunnell, he said. But the Bunnell and the Flagler Beach city managers “we talked to were happy with the service they were receiving,” County Administrator Heidi Petito said.
None of the county commissioners discussed costs or raised objections to the presentation: Pontieri asked more questions than her county colleagues. She was interested in defraying some of the costs. Licensing and fines bring in some money, but not much. Grossman says increasing licensing costs could offset sheltering costs at the Flagler Humane Society (for which the city pays $90,000 a year). It would not offset animal control costs. Raising licensing charges would be a council decision. “The licensing fee has not gone up ever,” Grossman said. “It’s always been $5 for your spayed or neuter, and $10 if not altered.”
The next step would be the joint agreement between Palm Coast and the county that would, in Grossman’s summary, “define the scope of services and response responsibilities between the city and the county, formalize the cost sharing model, terms and performance expectations, identify legal representation for county related enforcement cases, staffing and resource planning, hire and on board to additional animal control officers.”
“We will get back together as a full board to talk about our options,” Commission Chair Andy Dance said, and “finalize a decision,” but based on the more limited scope–one animal control officer, one tech, one vehicle, which would lower start-up costs by over $150,000.
The $300,000 the county currently pays the Humane Society covers both sheltering and animal control services–specifically, $215,000 for animal control and $106,000 for sheltering, according to the county administrator. The county would end only the animal control portion if it is to merge with Palm Coast.
hjc says
Please do not get the city involved. CUT THE PALM COAST BUDGET DO NOT ADD TO IT.
Pauline says
What if the Flagler Humane Society decides they no longer will shelter those animals? I didn’t read in this article who will be doing the veterinary care for the animals, emergency care, spay/neutering, vaccines, heart worm medicines and that cost isn’t mentioned in this article.
Something just isn’t adding up completely.
DP says
So here we go again from city staff, and Pontieri, talking about raising fess such as licensing, and fines. I don’t see this city or county having enough animals registered/licensed to offset $ 90,000.00 given to the Humane Society. Before this city continues to add additional taxes, fees or whatever they wish to call it on the current and future citizens. Some living outside thier means due to fixed income. You do due diligence and check what other municipalities charges for licensing and registering of animals. The last I knew is governments are not supposed to be making money, but break even or almost cover expenses. The $ 5, and $ 10 license IMO are ridiculous. A metal tag doesn’t cost that much. Do away with the tags, and send an email, or letter to the owner. Tags end up getting lost or fall off the collars. Stop suggesting, and nickel and dime the citizens. You may just end up with more surrendered animals.
Dennis C Rathsam says
Ronald Reagan said beware folks, many years ago,When you here” Im from the government & Im here to help”
JimboXYZ says
What is the cost effective alternative ? Who will handle this going forward. It’s one thing to complain about the Humane Society, another thing to have a better solution, or in this case any real solution ? The startup costs alone would be nearly 2X what the existing contract is. Who knows, maybe they expect the growth to pay for all of this, while the increased population creates more animal issues for abuse & neglect ?
Nancy Malfara says
Oh gosh no! Palm Coast doesn’t take care of what they are responsible for already……the poor animals
Roger says
Another waste if money by our elected officials. Instead of paying the Humane Society $300,000 they want to pay Palm Coast over $500.00 for thr same work the first year and the about $300,000 a year afterwards. I doubt that the price we pay remains at that very long.
I’ve been to the Humane Society many times and they are always professional. You should not mess with something that’s working.
Jessica Myers says
I really wish everyone interested in this topic would actually read this very well written article and then maybe do some research BEFORE making comments. This is a solution to the non-existent animal control services the county now has. Currently if you contact FHS for any “animal control” needs, there is no response or assistance given. There is however a very well organized and effective animal control department within Palm Coast. The county (and its residents) would benefit greatly by making this change.
Change says
Look back at previous articles regarding issues. They had an animal control officer charged with a crime after she stuck a dog shot many times in a crate without vet care. This is humane? This PRIVATE organization has many issues with care and transparency.
https://flaglerlive.com/flagler-humane-society-board-members-brazenly-reproach-city-and-county-officials-push-for-accountability/
Jane Gentile-Youd says
What insane standards of how to spend taxpayers hard earned money. County Commissioners had no problem paying a county employee $335,000 salary and allowing them to incumber another $110 000 a year to outsource 90% of their responsibilities in addition to squandering almost $200 000 ‘ going away” present to that same 1 employee but make a big deal about caring for animals. We love Dr. Frank . He saved us over $900 by removing a lump on our dog’s under local while 3 other vets wanted to use general anesthesia and biopsy fees . Our dog was just fine and no more huge lump.
It is very sad aside from having far less concern for funding a humane and necessary service than for rewarding 1 single employee far more per year with no questions asked nor extra expenses they incur upon us taxpayers. Now let’s add another $150,000 year for that employee’s ‘assistant’…
Sickening is too kind a word for such lopsided priorities in my opinion.
Jane Gentile-Youd says
Oops ! Sorry that 1 employee’s ‘no questions asked’ salary I referred to was $325,000 per year not $335,000.
Sally says
Does the county ordinances apply to the City of PC ordinances? I don’t believe so. Also the fee for a city license is going to cover the expenses for the City of PC to take control of animal control for the county and city, who do they think believe that lie?
Once again, the taxpayers are being lied to by the PC City Officials.
Flagler Humane Society has been in operation for over 40 years and handling animal control for the county, why doesn’t the City of PC let Flagler Humane Society handle animal control like they used to do very efficently?
JimboXYZ says
This is better sold to the taxpayer to be similar to the YMCA, the STF expansions. As an expansion of/to the Humane Society. I predict any county based shadow operation of what the Humane Society already does, as eventually a farming out of any county facility over capacity back to the Humane Society in a contractual partnership of sorts again. Even if the county concept is approved, the Humane Society would become a continue to contract with any overflow capacity that the county facility reaches & exceeds for it’s capacity. Building a safety net of sorts for abused & neglected pets that irresponsible pet owners create for a need. DCF is the safety net for children, Humane Society the safety net for animals/pets.
We don't deserve dogs says
The hypocrisy of the flagler commissioners is on full display, they responsible for allowing raw sewage to flow through the ditches in our neighborhoods because they didn’t plan ahead yet accuse the humane society of failing to plan for growth. We voted out or crooked mayor to put our new Mayor in that is actually planning for the future instead of deflecting responsibility. Can’t wait to vote out this hypocritical board (the same board that tried to build a fuel depot in top of matanzas without a much as an environmental impact study).
Laurel says
“…but based on the more limited scope–one animal control officer, one tech, one vehicle, which would lower start-up costs by over $150,000.”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Okay. One hell of a learning curve ahead.