Sacramento's Animal Shelter’s Homeless Outreach and Assistance Program (HOAP). (Photo: sacramentocityexpress.com)
Sacramento Taxpayers Pay for Mobile Veterinary Clinic for Homeless Drug Addicts’ Pets
Paid out of Measure U, a ‘temporary half-cent sales tax’ from 2012
By Katy Grimes, July 26, 2025 9:39 am
Sacramento Taxpayers are paying for a “Mobile Veterinary Clinic” for Homeless Drug addicts’ and street people’s pets. The City of Sacramento has decided that rather than pay for drug and mental health treatment for homeless drug addicts, they will use taxpayer funds to vaccinate and spay/neuter the pets of the City’s homeless.
That’s some real “quality of life” prioritizing going on by city bureaucrats. In reality, they don’t want the homeless off the streets as homeless drug addicts are a massive revenue source.
With a budget deficit of $44.1 million, the city is neutering and spaying the pets of the thousands of homeless drug addicts living on our streets. The Sacramento City Council approved a $1.7 billion budget for Fiscal Year 2025/26 in June. I can think of a few budget items that can be cut…
“Front Street Animal Shelter’s Homeless Outreach and Assistance Program (HOAP) is celebrating its first neuter surgery performed inside its new mobile veterinary clinic,” the City of Sacramento reported Friday.
“This milestone marks an important step in expanding veterinary care to unhoused pet owners and underserved communities. The fully equipped van now allows the HOAP team to provide on-the-spot exams, vaccinations, treatments and spay and neuter services directly in the field.”
“This moment has been years in the making, and it’s hard to put into words how proud and excited we are to see it finally in motion,” said Animal Care Service Manager, Phillip Zimmerman. “The HOAP team is rewriting what community animal welfare can look like.”
That’s funny – I have to pay thousands of dollars annually for all of my veterinary care. And the City of Sacramento recently threatened to fine me $600 if I did not re-license my two dogs.
Homeless drug addicts’ dogs are not licensed. But they are getting free veterinary care now.
This “quality of life” service is being paid for by Measure U funding, passed in 2012 by Sacramento voters, it’s a “temporary half-cent sales tax” to restore essential services that had been cut or scaled back during the Great Recession.
Poppycock – it’s a city slush fund. The City of Sacramento could have and should have cut back its own bloated administrative staff back during “the Great Recession,” but didn’t and still won’t. Instead, they put additional sales taxes on the ballot, and convince low-information voters to pass these “quality of life” taxes.
Proof of a city slush fund – it’s a a “general-purpose tax.”
According to the City of Sacramento, “Measure U is a general-purpose tax – the revenue it produces goes into the City’s General Fund and can be used for any municipal purpose. Measure U helps maintain and improve quality of life in Sacramento by providing funding for safer neighborhoods, better-maintained parks, and stronger community programs.”
But Measure U also goes for Public Safety! So it has to be important.
Budgeted for public safety in Measure U funds is $21,635,930 through 2029.
Animal enforcement has received $1,977,933 under community development.
Here is the City of Sacramento Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Measure U approved city budget of $159,317,260:
and the approved 2024-2025 Measure U Police Department budget $10,175,308:
Here is the 2024-2025 approved Measure U budget for the City Manager $6,975,558:
The Sacramento City Manager gets an additional $7 million to spend?
And the Community Development 2024-2025 approved Measure U budget $18,168,816:
Notice that the City of Sacramento is spending an additional $4 million on neighborhood code compliance… gird your loins – they are coming for your property.
And taxpayers are paying for the spaying and neutering of homeless drug addicts’ pets because, “While many people in our community are struggling with the high costs of pet ownership and decreased availability of veterinary care, the unsheltered population faces some of the greatest challenges,” Zimmerman said.
The “unsheltered population” – the latest euphemism for homeless drug addicts, created to justify “housing” for homeless rather than treatment.
Further justifying the “housing” is HOAP Program Coordinator, Jenna Topper:
“In a reality where individuals face multiple barriers toward accessing housing, our team is dedicated to supporting people and their pets so that animal-related obstacles are not one of them,” she said.
Ah, so that’s it – they are living on the streets because they can’t “access housing.”
Taxpayers need to not only provide homeless drug addicts homes, apartments, transit passes, food, and medical care, now we are paying for their pet care.
When will we show some decency and send the homeless on much-needed European vacations?
Here are a few photos of Sacramento’s “unhoused” I took within the last week:
There are homeless living in RVs and SUVs in the park, a woman lives in an old school bus, people live in cars, in tents, or we see them just passed-out on the grass. I see them grouped together daily buying/selling/doing drugs.
This guy lives in the park. Thursday I saw him shooting up in his leg.
And a few more:
The City of Sacramento budget is not focused on the priorities the people want and need; rather it is the priorities of the administrative class, which keeps expanding. The administrative class only cares about their jobs, rather than the services taxpayers and residents require.
Here’s a thought: why not take the city taxpayer funding allocated for homeless vagrants’s pets, and spend it on treatment of the homeless drug addicts? We wouldn’t need to vaccinate their pets that way.
A California native and Navy mom, Katy lives in Sacramento, CA.
- Gov Newsom ‘Bends the Knee’ to Trump After Maligning President at NYT Event - December 4, 2025
- Trump Administration to Withhold SNAP Funds From Democrat States - December 3, 2025
- Another Lawsuit Challenging CA’s Proposition 50: Violates 15th Amendment & Voting Rights Act - December 3, 2025
RELATED ARTICLES
-
-
February 27, 2023 -
Thanks Katy.
I wonder how many other cities are doing the same thing? Alameda county is releasing 80 million dollars to the cities in their county from a 1/2 cent sales tax as well, meant for the homeless.
This type of veterinarian service should strictly be non profit. I am a HUUGE dog lover and I am sure those who feel inclined would donate to help these animals in need.
Now with that being said, I find it interesting that the reasoning is to prioritize vaccination for these pets. Maybe some need it who knows how these dogs were acquired. Without medical records and a known history, how do they know these dogs even are in in need of MORE VAXXES! Hmmm, if I did not not know any better I would guess big pharma and the mobile vets are the winners here. Pharma gets to sell more product to the county and the vets who dole it out get a bonus…..
I am such a skeptic now that when it comes to doling out our tax dollars there is always a grift involved.
Use that money to get to the root of the problem, mental health services and drug treatment. Start setting up county triage units, conquer and divide the needs and the homeless will have a roof over their heads. Money better spent IMHO.
Thank You for Common Sense. I almost didn’t want to read this article because it looked like more bleeding heart non-sense. I do have to admit that I feel sorry for the animals much more than I do for these low-life tweakers. The addicts have a choice, the animals don’t. So sick of all these Liberal Loonies insisting on Free Love, Free Drugs, Free Housing, Free Food, Free Transportation, Free Society, Free Will, and Free Laws. It’s called SCURGE and it isn’t FREE to the rest of us who have to look at it, smell it, avoid it, fear it, be victimized by it, and PAY for it.
When people VOTE for this rancid puke they need to pull their hippie heads out of their rectums and take a deep fresh educated breath of reality.
The biggest benefit is spaying and neutering. Rabies is public safety concern.
I am so glad someone finally had the good sense to put this program together!
Exactly what I was thinking as I read the article. Thank you for pointing out what has become the most important aspect of pet ownership — too many unwanted and abandoned cats and dogs.
There are too many unwanted and abandoned cats and dogs in Sacramento because there are too many irresponsible people who should never have pets in the first place. Democrats and their taxpayer funded welfare and giveaway programs have turned Sacramento from what was once a pleasant city into a ghettoized mecca for irresponsible moochers from around the country and the world. This taxpayer funded program just incentivizes these moochers even more who now expect taxpayers to pay for their pet care in addition to providing them with taxpayer funded housing, transit passes, food, medical care, etc.
Wake up!
The Guber should issue another fiat, that any street beneficiary submit to a criminal backound check before taxpayer funded benefits are provided.
This article reminds me of the issue of skyrocketing veterinarian costs. I am fortunate that I have an old fashioned vet who uses common sense and keeps his charges low but I have seen that most vets these days seem to think they can charge Beverley Hills cosmetic surgeon rates. What is up with that? The costs I have been quoted from other vets are probably far higher than a MD would charge for treating humans but vets have far lower costs and probably little to no malpractice insurance costs. Thousands of dollars for minor procedures is crazy.
Oh yeah sure, gotta keep the unleashed drug-protecting vicious pit bulls that terrorize park visitors and THEIR dogs healthy and safe, right? And what better way than to finance it with a City of Sacramento sales tax that fills a slush fund that, when you see stuff like this, makes the average person want to spit from the absurdity and frustration of it, or laugh weakly from the unintended comedy of it (that van! come on!)
Meanwhile, why the heck don’t you City Fathers pick your euphemism and stick with it instead of changing the latest labeling of drug-addicted vagrants from “unhoused” to “unsheltered?” As if?
And how the heck is the average Sacramento taxpayer who dares to step into a park benefiting in any way from ANY of this nonsense? I know that when I pass a city park that might otherwise beckon to me, the presence of even ONE “unsheltered” person hanging out with their belongings will put a stop to that. Because I know from experience that there is a chance that person could attack without warning, depending on the drug, and their possibly-vicious dog could attack too. So ONE “unsheltered person” in an otherwise safe-looking park is sorta like spitting in the soup. Who’s in for a lovely stroll? Only those who are armed or who have various protective sprays and panic whistles & etc.
This MUST STOP. We’ve had ENOUGH.
Using the term “half cent” for sales tax increases in disingenuous. Go buy a car, and see how much that “half cent” is costing you. It’s marketing term by the Marxist Democrats to dupe ignorant people into voting for sales tax increases.
People need to wise up, and stop voting for sales tax increases.
Katy, is this the lead up to Universal Basic Income?
I think it’s appropriate that the side of the van has a picture of a ghetto pitbull, the breed that has mauled to death more innocent people, including children, than all other breeds combined. That’s perfect.
Next up a syringe delivery van with pictures of people shooting up on the side.
No kidding. That actually WILL be next up.
Than all other breeds combined? Would you care to cite your source for this misinformation or is it that you believe every thought that comes into your head?…..because THAT definitely seems like a trustworthy source of information, haha
accept, change or eliminate mmkay
@Sapio, You sound like a Democrat. Can’t accept facts that don’t agree with your ideology, never check for yourself, and then get snarky.
Hopefully, you can read bar graphs and percentages. The other breeds combined aren’t even close.
https://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-fatalities-2019.php
Clarification needed:
Is H.O.A,P a non-profit operating separately from the “watchful eye” of the city or is it an actual department of the city?
Good question @Tomorrow.
It looks like it is attached to Sacramento Animal Services.
It was solely developed in 2022 for the care of the homeless populations animals.
https://animalcare.saccounty.gov/Pages/PAWS-PetAidWellnessServicesMobileClinic.aspx
The PAWS (Pet Aid and Wellness Services) Mobile Clinic appears to part of Sacramento County while the Front Street Animal Shelter’s Homeless Outreach and Assistance Program (HOAP) appears to be part of the City of Sacramento? Whatever the case may be, do taxpayers in the City and County of Sacramento want their tax dollars being used to fund mobile pet clinics specifically targeted for the animals of the homeless population?
Most of Sacramento’s homeless have major substance abuse issues along with mental health issues which makes it almost impossible to take care of themselves let alone animals? Maybe Front Street Animal Shelter should find the animals good stable homes and the City of Sacramento should use those taxpayer funds to treat homeless drug addicts/mentally ill as Katy Grimes suggested?
finding good stable homes for pets is a challenge. There are far more animals than homes. The rescue groups and shelters are up to their eyeballs and are euthanizing for space. Homeless people don’t spay and neuter. Their dogs and cats have litter after litter. Those animals end up on the streets getting pregnant and adding to the overpopulation. Right now the shelters are only taking in sick or injured animals.
Free spay and neuter for pets of the homeless is a start in the right direction.
Vaccinating for rabies is a public safety issue. The government needs to step up and provide this service for everyone. It’s less expensive than housing and killing animals.
This service will save money in the long run. This will help thes poor pets get medical care they deserve and prevent the birth amd suffering of thousands of unwanted pets.
Usually the dogs that the homeless have with them look traumatized and abused. They should not have animals in the first place! Same goes for the poor, it they can’t afford to provide the needed care for their animals, then they shouldn’t have animals. If bleeding heart liberal Democrats like Barbara Draws want to voluntarily contribute their money and time to nonprofit animal shelters then they should do so, but don’t require the rest of us hardworking taxpayers to support the pets of the homeless and the poor. Sacramento has too many other problems that our tax dollars should be used for like broken streets that full of potholes and cracks, failed public schools, crime infested neighborhoods, etc.
The PAWS (Pet Aid and Wellness Services) Mobile Clinic appears to part of Sacramento County while the Front Street Animal Shelter’s Homeless Outreach and Assistance Program (HOAP) appears to be part of the City of Sacramento? Whatever the case may be, do taxpayers in the City and County of Sacramento want their tax dollars being used to fund mobile pet clinics specifically targeted for the animals of the homeless population?
Thank You for Common Sense. I almost didn’t want to read this article because it looked like more bleeding heart non-sense. I do have to admit that I feel sorry for the animals much more than I do for these low-life tweakers. The addicts have a choice, the animals don’t. So sick of all these Liberal Loonies insisting on Free Love, Free Drugs, Free Housing, Free Food, Free Transportation, Free Society, Free Will, and Free Laws. It’s called SCURGE and it isn’t FREE to the rest of us who have to look at it, smell it, avoid it, fear it, be victimized by it, and PAY for it.
When people VOTE for this rancid puke they need to pull their hippie heads out of their rectums and take a deep fresh educated breath of reality.
Im sorry but your a fucking idiot lady. The mobile vet care is for more than just homeless people. People WITH homes , low income, go to them as well. yes some specifically help homeless people, but if you think w little bit logically, they are clearly not trying to benefit the homeless people , but the animals they have with them, so they can attempt to lower the number of puppies and kittens that are coming into the shelter . they have a budget that is dedicated to the homeless issue. you don’t have to be a genius to understand that. you don’t have anything better to do than be fucking karen, “ oh they are paying for drug addicted homeless peoples pets to get care” so what you would be okay with it if they required them to prove that they don’t do drugs before they can get care ? how about they spend more of our tax money to supply the drug tests while were at it. oh and btw lady, you have a job , so the real question is why aren’t YOU paying your pet license fees? it must be because you spent all your money on drugs . lmao.
AMEN!!!
“That’s funny – I have to pay thousands of dollars annually for all of my veterinary care. And the City of Sacramento recently threatened to fine me $600 if I did not re-license my two dogs.” So would you rather be a “homeless drug addict”? Because for a minute there your article makes it sound like they’re better off than you. The majority of people who are homeless are NOT drug addicts. I am a veterinarian who volunteers to provide basic care for the pets of the homeless. My clients at these clinics are some of the best pet owners I’ve ever worked with. They are not drug addicts. Many have serious health issues of their own and their pets are beloved to them, just like yours are to you – maybe even more so because their pets are their sole support system. How many of us are one health emergency or job loss away from being homeless? You ask “why not take the city taxpayer funding allocated for homeless vagrants’s pets, and spend it on treatment of the homeless drug addicts?” Do you know for a fact that funding isn’t already going to drug treatment programs? I just Googled the Sacramento Dept Health Services website where they list drug treatment resources. It’s possible to walk and chew gum at the same time, right, and fund both drug treatment and HOAP (and fill potholes, etc). One commenter touched on the public and herd health aspect of making sure dogs and cats are vaccinated and spayed/neutered. Beyond the concerns of population control and zoonotic diseases like rabies, a community outbreak of, say, Parvovirus, would increase the risk to other puppies and dogs out in the community.
What ever happened to dog licensing? That would be helpful in defraying the cost. Secondly, why are we regularizing the homeless by making it normal and acceptable?
Like India we have normalized human misery and have no plans end it. Do they also justify it by telling their children, ” Those the kids who did not do their homework”.
Starting with Obama we created a new normal. We have normalized the presence of trashy living, mental illness, and barking at the moon. Exactly what was our goal? I fergit?
Where’s the conflict of interest statement? Isn’t randy grimes Laurel Sagen’s top mover/help-himself-er – kinda seems like made news.
I hope they are scanning these dog and cats so they can be returned to their rightful owners. Most of the homeless pets are stolen.
bigoted heartless dismissive people like you are the reason homelessness is so hard to solve. For every positive move forward there is another close minded person to set it back. Being that self entitled people that think they owe nothing to society seem to be the norm the rest of us that care about a decent humane society have to work harder.
How many homeless people has holier than thou liberals like Barbara Gallo taken into her home and personally supported with her money? Most likely NONE!
Democrats and their taxpayer funded welfare and giveaway programs have turned Sacramento from what was once a pleasant city into a ghettoized mecca for irresponsible moochers from around the country and the world. This taxpayer funded program just incentivizes these moochers even more who now expect taxpayers to pay for their pet care in addition to providing them with taxpayer funded housing, transit passes, food, medical care, etc.
Instead of posting attacks in the California Globe comment section, why doesn’t Barbara Gallo do something constructive and go invite the many homeless who are living in William Land Park into her home. They may be suffering from drug induced psychosis, but Barbara Gallo is an open minded liberal who should welcome them into her home with open arms and an open checkbook!