The Salina Animal Control Advisory and Appeals Board on an agenda meeting (date not specified) voted to recommend that the city shelter consider humane euthanasia for dogs that remain in custody longer than one year when other placements or rescue options are exhausted, and rejected a separate board recommendation to ask the city to permit the shelter to adopt pit‑bulls to residents who live outside the City of Salina.

The vote to recommend euthanasia for animals held a year or longer followed extended discussion about shelter capacity, behavioral evaluations and rescue placements. Monique, shelter staff, told the board, “We don't have any volunteers,” when asked about on‑site volunteer capacity. Board member Grant Johansen moved the euthanasia recommendation; a second was recorded and members voted to approve the motion (motion text and vote recorded in the minutes; mover/second names and numeric tally not specified in the transcript excerpt).

The board next debated whether to advise the city to allow the shelter to complete pit‑bull adoptions to residents living outside Salina city limits. Proponents said wider geographic adoption options and transfers to other states help move animals out of the shelter; opponents raised concerns about owner responsibility and breed‑specific risks. A motion to advise the city to permit out‑of‑city pit‑bull adoptions was made and seconded; the board counted raised hands and the motion failed (the transcript records the motion and that it “fails,” but does not record a final numeric roll call in the text excerpt).

Members spent substantial time on shelter operations and volunteer program restoration. Greg Stevens, representing North Salina Community Development, described a planned working‑group format to gather shelter best practices from neighboring communities and said the neighborhood group was “just exploring this, basically.” Barb Young, identified as representing North Salina Community Development, and Deborah Cole from Kansas State (identified in board remarks as a potential facilitator) were mentioned as possible contributors to that outreach.

Board members and shelter staff described current operational constraints: the shelter runs monthly trap‑neuter‑return (TNR) events, reported four TNR dates so far this year and said 70 cats have been spayed or neutered to date; 13 kittens from TNR efforts were surrendered and later adopted, and the staff reported about 57 adult cats were returned to the community after TNR processing. Staff described the TNR clinic schedule as “the third Thursday of every month” when weather and vet availability permit, and said a contracted veterinarian typically works one day per week, which constrains how quickly animals can be cleared for adoption.

The shelter staff outlined several steps to reduce length‑of‑stay: lower adoption fees (staff cited a continuing $5 special for some dogs), more off‑site adoption events (Tractor Supply, Petco and community partner events were named), transfers to out‑of‑state rescue partners (staff reported outreach to contacts in Oklahoma, Nebraska and Colorado), and efforts to expand microchip registration. The shelter described an upcoming microchip clinic open to anyone for $10 per microchip; that $10 fee, staff said, covers insertion and the basic registration the shelter uses for reunification.

On volunteers and training, board members and staff described a gap since the former volunteer group dissolved. A board member suggested the city instead fund staff to cover lost volunteer hours; shelter staff said the city had added some positions after volunteers left and that discussions are underway with an outside consultant to design a volunteer program. The board and staff noted that a “well‑run volunteer group” typically provides training and that some shelter employees have taken online courses and webinars; staff said they do not currently have certified behaviorists on site and rely on in‑house training and volunteers who are experienced with animals.

Operational capacity figures discussed in the meeting included about 57 dog kennels at the facility (15–16 primary kennels plus two blocks of 10 and an additional garage area), periodic kennel overflow, and limited vet days that require a one‑week hold for animals that must be spayed or neutered before adoption. Staff said some pit‑bull‑type dogs are held longer because they arrive as court cases or require extensive behavioral work prior to transfer or adoption.

Several board procedures were also handled: the board amended and approved meeting minutes to add a section reflecting questions about the previous volunteer group's closure (the amendment and approval are recorded in the meeting minutes; the transcript records the motions and that the amended minutes were approved). Other procedural votes — including adding Grant Johansen's letter to the agenda — were also made during the meeting and are recorded in the minutes.

What this means going forward: the board's recommendation on euthanasia is advisory; any change to shelter policy or practice requires city staff and, where applicable, city commission action. The pit‑bull adoption recommendation was not adopted by the board and therefore will not be forwarded as a board endorsement to the commission. Staff said they will continue outreach to rescues and consultants and will circulate contact information and timeline proposals to board members as plans progress.

The meeting included public comment from neighborhood representatives proposing a working group and multiple rounds of questions from board members and staff about volunteer recruitment, transfer protocols, kennel capacity and TNR scheduling. The meeting adjourned after the board completed new and old business and received general announcements.