Alabama Animal Advocates

Sylacauga Council Weighs Dog ‘Dispatch’ by Landscaping Company with Lethal Side Hustle

Originally posted May 11, 2026, with updates through the May 21 council meeting. Written by Kristin Yarbrough, with thanks to those who contributed information and ideas. Also see Animal Services in Talladega County.

Sylacauga City Council Weighs Dog ‘Dispatch’ by Landscaping Company with a Side Hustle

Update: What Happened at the May 21 Sylacauga Council Meeting

The Sylacauga City Council met May 21, 2026 to continue discussion of the 15-20 loose dogs living in shopping center parking lots and grassy areas along the 280 corridor, the Sylacauga Animal Shelter, and Sylacauga Animal Control.

The meeting can be viewed on YouTube. Time stamps are provided below.

Residents offered the city and its ACO pro bono assistance in humane trapping:

Mayor Hubbard and Councilmembers raised questions about Sylacauga Animal Shelter, animal control, and city ordinances:

Councilmembers emphasized that the city is not taking any action at this time. Council President Nix reiterrated at 1:24:07 that the council is “only gathering information, just brainstorming, not taking any action […] and not voting on anything.” Councilmembers agreed to schedule a town hall to continue the discussion.

News reports on the May 21 meeting:

Mayor & Police Chief Propose ‘the Hunt’

“Are they weed eaters by day, dog snipers by night?” wondered Sylacauga Councilmember Laura Barlow Heath.

Yes, under Mayor Matt Hubbard’s plan for “the hunt.” The May 5, 2026 pitch by the Mayor and Police Chief asked councilmembers to allocate $24,800 in Sylacauga taxdollars to engage in animal cruelty violations that neither Chief Muse nor City Attorney Win Livingston have publicly addressed.

The last-minute agenda addition acknowledged neither the existence of the proposal nor its incendiary bullet points:

After years of “kicking the can down the road,“ in the words of Council President Pro Tem Tim Vincent, the city is determined to address the large number of loose dogs — so if not the Mayor’s proposal, what are Sylacauga’s options?

In this piece we offer the “constructive solutions” requested by Councilmember Greer Bisignani, examine the blaming of those offering food to the dogs, consider city leaders’ pledges of transparency, and review the policy decisions of the city and Talladega County that have led to this crossroads.

Why So Many Loose Dogs?

Amid explanations and defenses, several officials acknowledged the years of inaction. Sylacauga Animal Shelter Director Stephanie Engle explained the unsuccessful attempts to trap the dogs and discussed recent dog bites and even animals exposed to meth.

Decades of Avoiding the Issue: Sylacauga Animal Shelter director Stephanie Engle and Councilmembers Tiffany Nix and Tim Vincent all acknowledged that loose dogs have been a longstanding problem in Sylacauga: “In past years,” Vincent said, “[the city has] just been kicking the can down the road.” Council President Tiffany Nix said, "We've been put on notice… We can’t just keep letting it go on cause it’s just going to get worse.” Residents informed us that the problem has been ignored for at least a decade. “I grew up 10 miles from Sylacauga, left in 1971,” one person wrote, “and never wanted to go back because of the dead dogs that littered the highway between [Sylacauga and Childersburg].” At the May 21 meeting, Vincent described watching a 2016 council meeting to research history of this issue and said the same problems were discussed, same questions asked, and nothing has changed.

The city has “been addressing this issue,” Mayor Matt Hubbard explained, for “four, four-and-a-half months ago maybe,” by attempting to trap the dogs in a Missy Trap constructed and deployed by ACO Brandon Gerrins at the woodline near Publix Super Market, Engle said.

Ineffective Communication: Mayor Matt Hubbard and Shelter Director Stephanie Engle blamed the community for crippled the city’s trapping efforts by feeding the dogs. “We can't get these animals to go into a trap because we’ve had people that feed them constantly,” Engle said at the May 5 Sylacauga City Council work session. Local residents, though, tell us that the city made little effort to inform good Samaritans of the need to pause feeding so that the dogs would seek the food in the trap. Our understanding is that no signage was posted in the area, nor was the message displayed on the city marquee. “I haven’t seen any measures being taken to put up signage in the areas to instruct people not to feed the animals,” Sylacauga resident Ashley Cunningham told Charlize Ramos of CBS42. The only instructions from the city, in our awareness, are Facebook posts by the shelter account dated Dec. 20, 2025 and Mar. 17, 2026. Nix acknowledged the need for signage at the May 21 work session (1:26:23); Hubbard then states he has spoken to GBHS that an ordinance is required to “prevent interfering with a government operation.“

Regional Lack of State-Mandated Animal Services: Mayor Matt Hubbard pointed out the culpability of neighboring counties that lack state-mandated animal services. Even though Alabama requires that every county have a pound and impoundment officer, Talladega County and several other counties in central east Alabama have no pound and no animal control officers. Since dogs don’t know jurisdiction, Sylacauga’s neighbors are contributing to the number of dogs roaming in the city.

Region-Wide Choice to Not Require Dog Confinement: Since 1915, each Alabama county has had the option to adopt Alabama Code § 3-1-5, which requires owners to confine dogs to their own premises. Since Emily’s Law (Control of Dangerous Dogs) is applicable statewide, there is no excuse for counties not to adopt § 3-1-5 for public safety, quality of life, and a reduction on the strain on animal services — yet neither Talladega County nor Coosa, Clay, Tallapoosa, Cleburne, nor Randoph County Commissioners have made the simple election to adopt the statute. The inaction of these county governments ultimately affects Sylacauga and every other city in the county. Sylacauga and other Talladega County municipalities do require dog confinement by ordinance, though it is unclear whether these local laws are enforced.

‘Weed Eaters by Day, Dog Snipers by Night?’

“It’s just a larger issue than one animal control officer can handle,” Sylacauga Mayor Matt Hubbard told WIAT. “So we’ve reached out for professional help,” Hubbard said of the plan he and Sylacauga Police Chief Rondell Muse had developed with Green Landscaping salesman Quint Henninger.

But why would a landscaping company advise on dog concerns? “Are they weed eaters by day, dog snipers by night?” wondered Councilmember Laura Barlow Heath.

“They do this for Honda America,” Chief Muse explained. “Honda America has all kinds of animals, pigs — whatever — running through [their plant in Lincoln, Alabama]. What Honda was looking for was someone to take care of their problem…. So we were hoping they could do the same thing for the city.” The company is reportedly licensed to trap wildlife. There is no such licensing for dog trapping or sniping.

Did Sylacauga Officials Act Transparently?

Sylacauga Mayor Matt Hubbard opted to present his proposal in a city council work session — a public meeting at which the document would be public record — rather than at an executive session, where legal matters can be discussed confidentially.

Apparently Hubbard and several other public officials had hoped to consider the proposed capture or execution of the dogs without public scrutiny. Instead, outraged residents fueled the proposal’s circulation on Facebook throughout the Tuesday morning and afternoon leading up to the 5:00 p.m. meeting. Constituents filled the seats of the meeting room. As he began his lengthy remarks about the last-minute agenda item, which was the subject of more than half of the 90-minute work session, Hubbard mustered no enthusiasm in addressing the “few extra people here.”

“I’m a quiet leader,” Mayor Hubbard explained. “I don’t want to draw attention to things.”

Several officials responded by defending their choices. “At no point in time has this ever tried to be non-transparent or any of that type stuff,” Mayor Hubbard said. “We have not had a secret meeting,” Council President Tiffany Nix promised. “The only reason y’all didn't know about this in the planning stages,” Chief Muse explained, pointing to a news camera, “is because of what’s going on now.”

Had city leaders truly wished to be transparent, might they have acknowledged the proposal on the agenda, at the very least? After all, transparency may be defined as the absence of a hidden agenda. And really, wouldn’t true, full transparency mean also providing the proposal PDF along with the agenda, so that constituents could familiarize themselves with documents to be discussed at the meeting?

The proposal’s existence was news even to Councilmember Laura Barlow Heath, who represents the district under discussion. “I was in the dark. I had no idea the meeting had taken place,” Heath said.

While constituents felt blindsighted to learn of the plan only hours before its public discussion, Councilmember Greer Bisignani expressed that it was the council whose trust had been breached by whomever might have shared a screenshot of the proposal that morning. Bisignani opened her written remarks by declaring the council’s care and compassion for animals. “Even more concerning at present is how this document became public,” Bisignani continued. “The release of an internal preliminary proposal before any real council review represents a serious breach of trust. Our process depends on the ability to review, discuss, and refine our ideas before they are presented to the public.” Bisignani asked the mayor to investigate.

Since the public was at that point entitled to view the proposal — as of the meeting, it was a public document — what trust was breached or what process was compromised by the public viewing that document a few hours earlier?

Two days after Tuesday evening’s 55-minute discussion of the proposal, Mayor Hubbard told WBRC that the proposal had not even been a consideration. “We still haven’t had a chance to discuss it,” Hubbard said. On May 12, WTVM reported that Hubbard told them “he believes shooting dogs is inhumane and he is fully against it,” stating in interview footage, “As long as I’m mayor, an option like that, that’s never gonna happen. We’re not gonna shoot animals in the city of Sylacauga.”

Troubling Legality

The course of action proposed by Mayor Hubbard, Chief Muse, and Green Landscaping appeared to violate Alabama Code § 34-29-132, a statute that allows for the shooting of domestic animals in emergency situations, such as an imminent threat — if and only if the animal is suffering and facing death, and only after a concerted but unsuccessful effort to locate the owner. The proposal also raises questions related to Alabama’s animal cruelty statutes, under which it is criminal cruelty to kill or injure an animal in the absence of an immediate threat of attack.

At the May 5 work session, Councilmember Greer Bisignani assured constituents that the council will seek “solutions that are responsible, lawful, and in the best interest of our entire community.” Bisignani encouraged “all parties to come to the table with solutions — constructive solutions, not just your opposition.”

Sylacauga City Attorney Win Livingston weighed in on the municipality’s liability in the event of dog attack fatality, but did not address whether the proposal itself described legal actions.

What Have Sylacauga Officials Said They’ll Do?

Mayor Hubbard wrapped meeting discussion by stating that he would work Green Landscaping’s Quint Henninger “to get the verbiage finalized” for a vote on the contract at the May 21 council meeting. [This plan was later scrapped.] Council President Tiffany Nix initiated voting on whether to authorize a $25,000 budget allocation. “[Mayor Hubbard] cannot move forward without the funds in place,” Nix said, to which Councilmember Laura Barlow observed that contract negotiations did not seem contingent on an advanced allocation.

Heath cast the lone vote against the budget allocation. “[U]nder the City Council’s Rules of Procedure, when an item is introduced the same night it is presented, the Council cannot take final action on it unless the rules are suspended,” Heath explained. “Suspending the rules requires a unanimous vote of all five Council members. I voted against suspending the rules, which prevented a final vote from occurring that night. As a result, it will return in the agenda for a vote at the May 21st meeting.”

Councilmembers Laura Barlow Heath and Tim Vincent expressed substantial concerns over the proposal. “This is just going to mask the problem,” Vincent said. “It’s not going to fix it. We gotta come up with some issues or some way to stop this from recurring. We can’t go euthanizing dogs, shooting dogs every year.” Vincent, who described himself as a dog rescuer, voiced strongest objection to foothold traps. “Option 3 to me is the worst option,” he said. On May 7, Vincent addressed the topic on Facebook, stating, “I cannot support solutions centered around aggressive trapping or shooting of these animals as the primary response to this issue.”

Meanwhile, Councilmember Nate Brewer enthusiastically endorsed what Sylacauga Police Chief Rondell Muse termed “the hunt” of dogs living in shopping plaza parking lots bordering Highway 280. “I fully support everything in this packet,” Brewer said. “I fully support Option 1, 2, and 3.”

On May 7 and May 12, as described above, Mayor Hubbard claimed he does not support shooting dogs. On a May 19 Facebook reel, Hubbard seemed to state that the shooting option in the proposal will not be considered.

Suggestions for Sylacauga Officials

Follow the Guidance of an Alabama Animal Control Veteran: Steven Tears, who has directed Montgomery Humane Society for 20 years, has offered his guidance to Sylacauga officials on effective trapping and other strategies. Councilmember Laura Barlow Heath told me on May 7 that she intended to call Tears that afternoon.

Ask Talladega County Commission to Adopt Alabama’s Dog Confinement Law: The county’s choice to allow running-at-large is a public safety issue and disproportionately burdens Sylacauga and the the county’s other municipalities, especially considering the Talladega County has no impoundment facility, no animal control, and has contributed only minimally to low-cost spay and neuter accessibility. County Commissioners need only pass a resolution to adopt Alabama Code § 3-1-5. The law can be enforced even in counties without ACOs.

Insist that Talladega County Commission Comply with Alabama’s Pound & Impoundment Officer Requirements: Until the county can establish their own facility, Commissioners can satisfy the state mandate by hiring an ACO and contracting with a vet or animal hospital for boarding. Good Samaritans should be able to help an animal without being required to pay an impoundment fee for an animal they do not own, without being charged with theft of property, and without being told their only choice is to keep the animal or that because they offered the animal food they now own the animal — there is no basis for such a claim in Alabama law. Good Samaritans should not be penalized for doing the government’s job. When shelters refuse to impound dogs found running at large or require a fee for residents to turn in a found pet, they are promoting abandonment (which is illegal when done by the public) and are failing in their public safety mission.

Establish a Dog Control Fund: Since Sylacauga leaders are considering spending $25,000, they should establish a fund for traps, food for traps, signage about not feeding dogs, overtime for people who will need to supervise night trapping, and care for dogs once they are trapped. Remaining money can be utilized for similar future situations and to assist the public that they serve such as by offering dog houses and run lines to help families keep dogs on their own premises and low-cost spay/neuter to reduce the number of stray animals. The city can use this opportunity to make it clear to residents that dogs must be confined and to tell people that help is available.

Update the City’s Animal Code which has gone untouched since 1989 and contains a bizarre restraint law involving sweeps. Sylacauga leaders would be wise to look to Arab’s ordinance for standards of care for dogs who live outside. Additionally, Sylacauga and all other Alabama cities should have a provision in the city code related to adoption of state misdemeanor offenses as offenses against the city — including Beau’s Law, which takes effect in October.

Sources / Contacts