Riverside County Faces Court Battle Over Hayden Act Compliance

A heated legal battle is unfolding in Riverside County as animal activists challenge the county’s compliance with the Hayden Act, a state law designed to protect shelter animals. Dozens of advocates filled the courtroom in support, highlighting widespread concern over the county’s handling of animal welfare policies.

Mary Strong, reporting on The Roggin Report, noted the large turnout. “It was standing room only at one point,” she said, adding that the judge seemed unsurprised, likely due to the extensive media coverage of the case.

At the center of the dispute is whether the county is fulfilling its legal obligations. The Walter Clark legal group and attorney Dan Bolton argue that even the funded portions of the Hayden Act are being ignored. Meanwhile, the county contends that the law is an “unfunded mandate”—meaning the state has not provided money to enforce it—so they aren’t required to comply.

A contradiction emerged when Supervisor Manuel Perez publicly advocated for a no-kill county, yet the county’s attorney, Christopher Lockwood, argued against following the law. Making matters worse, Lockwood did not appear in court in person, opting instead to participate via Zoom, while Bolton and Clark showed up in person.

Adding to the confusion, a May 9, 2024, letter from the Department of Animal Services states that the county is committed to transparency, a 90% live release rate, and full compliance with the Hayden Act—a claim seemingly at odds with the county’s legal defense.

The judge has scheduled a March 21st hearing, requiring both sides to submit detailed briefings specifically on the Hayden Act. As the case moves forward, animal advocates continue to push for accountability, questioning whether Riverside County is truly committed to protecting shelter animals or simply avoiding responsibility.

For more Roggin Report stories, head over to NBCPalmSprings.com.