Atlanta loses its animal control services

ATLANTA — The dogcatcher may not be coming when Atlanta residents call.

Fulton County cut off animal control services Friday to the city of Atlanta, saying city officials haven’t agreed to pay the increased cost, which has jumped from roughly $2.5 million a year to $6.4 million.

Atlanta Mayor Andre Dickens in turn blamed Fulton County, claiming it was the county that backed out of an agreement. But county officials told local news outlets that the city’s proposal failed to include an agreement to pay for services the county has provided since the previous contract expired at the end of 2023.

The sniping among the Democrats who run Georgia’s most populous city and county escalated, with the city suggesting county officials cut off animal control because officials were mad Dickens had criticized the county over inmate deaths at the Fulton County jail.

The city said in a press release that it was “identifying emergency services to care for animals in our city humanely,” but it was unclear what those services were as of Saturday. County Manager Dick Anderson said Friday that animal control calls would be transferred to the city’s 911 call center and that he expected the Atlanta Police Department would be tasked with responding.

Fulton County Commission Chair Robb Pitts said in a Friday news conference that the county faces legal liability if it provides services without a contract. He said Fulton County’s 14 other cities have agreed to pay the increased cost. The county provides the services through a contract with nonprofit LifeLine Animal Services.

“It is unfair to taxpayers in all of our other cities to ask that they subsidize the services within the city of Atlanta, which is by far the greatest user of animal control services, constituting 55% of all calls,” Pitts said.

Pitts said the increase reflects “only the true cost of service” and that Fulton County is paying for a new $40 million animal shelter out of its own budget. He said the county had continued providing services after the earlier contract expired in a “good faith” belief that the city would soon sign an agreement.