BENNETTSVILLE — During its September meeting, Bennettsville City Council focused on animal-control problems affecting the city, including the authenticity of the Humane Society of Marlboro County’s contract and the county seat’s ongoing stray-animal population crisis.
A Tale of Conflicting Contracts
During discussions, council members disputed which version of the Humane Society of Marlboro County contract they formally approved. Some believed the vote covered the original agreement submitted in April, while others said the document later presented for signature contained substantial changes. Resolving the disagreement was challenging due to the absence of prepared minutes from the special meeting when the vote occurred, hampering council’s ability to confirm which contract actually received council approval.
“I’m just concerned [about] the contract we have with the humane society,” Councilman Cy’Heim McRae said, adding the contract the council agreed to is not the same contract discussed before the public during the council’s August 26, workshop. He went on to confirm the president of the humane society, Jennifer Hyduke, did email council a version of the contract, however McRae stated that some members either did not receive the email or were unable to open the file.
McRae said because council has not signed a new contract with the humane society, City Administrator William Simon Jr. received a letter dated September 8, 2026, from the society stating, “This is the agreement city council voted to approve as submitted on April 2, I am leaving it for your signature. If the agreement isn’t signed by a city official by close of business today, Tuesday, September 8, 2026, we will request that the city remove all city animals from our shelter, and we will no longer accept any animals from the city. We are prepared to go to court regarding this matter if we have to.”
Councilman McRae pointed out the agreement alluded to by the humane society was not the one previously agreed to by council.
He said, “How can you get your employees to enter into something that has not been brought or been discussed with council? I just don’t think that is right. If the administrator took it upon himself and entered into something that was discussed differently from council, we’d be right now going into executive session to try to terminate. But when we do it, and we make him do it, everything is all fine.” McRae added, “We are losing credibility here over a few dollars and I just think that we need to kind of re-evaluate this thing.”
Seeking clarity regarding the disputed contracts, Councilwoman Caraline Harpe requested the minutes from the workshop but was denied by Simon on the basis he did not “think they are prepared.”
After a brief recap of events regarding contract negotiations, Harpe said “I’m not sure how but when the humane society showed up to sign the contract that we voted on, they were presented with a different contract that was substantially altered. After we voted. So, if anything is unethical, I think it’s, you know, going after council had voted on a contract and changing that.”
Administrator Simon, however, was quick to refute her claim, saying that when asked by council to draw up a new contract with the humane society he checked with council whom he understood told him to revert to the “original contract as submitted.”
He said, “The only original contract that I have seen is the one that we were discussing at the meeting. Now I know you say one may have been submitted— the only thing I recall is an email that came through that I could not open the file and I have not seen anything else nor have we officially presented anything else to council.”
At his words, Harpe reiterated that she emailed her fellow council members the contract in April. She said, “This has been going on since 2023 guys. They got a contract.”
Simon again said he only knew of one contract.
“You made a reference to an action that I made being unethical,” Simon said, adding, “I put that contract together because that is the contract that I thought that we discussed and was originally submitted. So, it was nothing unethical on my part.”
Continuing discussion, McRae and Simon both stated the workshop was on video for review, but when Harpe asked for the video to be pulled up for reference on the TV in the room, McRae answered, “It’s public information, we got videos on YouTube, all you gotta do is go back and look at the meeting— it got audio and it has visual.”
Cutting through the disagreements, Mayor Tyron Abraham requested the council look for a solution rather than points of contention.
He said, “How can we resolve this— we are not in a position to house animals. We are going to have to use the humane society. I make a motion that we’ll accept the contract that was originally submitted by the humane society, which is already accepted, then we look at a solution of what we can do for the years to come.”
Solutions
Many council members suggested looking at available properties or possibly bringing already existing properties up to code to house animals, such as the building on Huckabee Street. All members expressed a desire to work together to form solutions for a problem they say has dogged the county for nearly a decade.
Public Comment
Public comments from the meeting highlight the need for council to come together on the issue of animal control.
Resident Catherine Foutz addressed her animal control grievances before council, sharing that she did not believe the shelter is responsible for the astronomical stray animal problem the county is facing.
She said, “You cannot transport your way out of a problem that is continuously being created faster than the shelter can solve it. I think we need to make a conscious effort to have two conversations at the same time: how do we adequately support the humane society in dealing with the crisis that exists today, and how do we get to the root of the problem so someday fewer animals need them [humane society] in the first place.”
Taking the podium next, Pamela Best pointed out she has been coming before council regarding animal control for the last four years, citing incidents she witnesses daily while delivering mail around the county. To emphasize her point, Best showed council a video of a dog running down an undisclosed street in Bennettsville with an extension cord tied around its neck.
“So, when she [Foutz] talks about how people see our community— what do you think they think when they see cats and dogs here— it’s not a good look,” she said. “You have to get the population under control, until you do that it’s a revolving door,” Best said.
Caught in the Cross hairs
Outside Bennettsville, a concerned resident in the town of McColl reached out to the Herald-Advocate over the weekend about two neglected dogs located within the city limits of McColl on Gray Road they said were refused care by the Humane Society of Marlboro County due to the town of McColl’s lack of a contract with the humane society.
Cindy Dixson is the director of the humane society and the Herald-Advocate spoke with her by phone Tuesday for clarification.
Dixon explained that while the outlying towns in Marlboro County do not have individual contracts with the shelter, they will make exceptions in severe abuse, neglect, or endangerment cases to provide assistance for the animals. She also mentioned a common misconception is that the humane society goes out on calls. Dixon said that the humane society works with animal control and receives animals who are picked up or surrendered, but does not physically go get them.
“Clio and McColl are supposed to handle their own cases. We do not have a contract with either Clio or McColl. The Animal Control does not have a contract with Clio or McColl, so they do not answer city limit calls,” Dixson said.
When asked about why Clio and McColl do not have contracts, Humane Society of Marlboro County President Jennifer Hyduke explained neither town has a code enforcement agreement with the county.
“Our hands are tied,” said Hyduke, adding, “In regards to the situation in McColl we did offer food.”
The Herald Advocate later spoke with Officer Q. Bright with Animal Control who confirmed that he went to the scene and made sure the dogs were fed and watered.
“I went out there again yesterday [Tuesday] and checked on both, made sure they were fed and had water. It’s sad to see, I don’t know how people allow their dogs to get so bad off,” Officer Bright said.
According to town of McColl officials a plan is now in place with the owner of the property to ensure the continued safety and care of the two dogs is maintained in the future.
When asked about having a contract with the humane society, one resident from McColl said, “It’s a real sad situation. I thought being the Humane Society of Marlboro County, you just call them and they come out — I didn’t know all that about having a contract. I guess I was wrong.”
One Clio resident said, “Personally, I don’t see programs from [the humane society] like I have in previous years— pet adoptions, vaccine days, neutering clinics— it seems like animals are hanging around too long. I don’t see where building a state-of-the-art animal shelter is going to fix the problem, it would only get bigger. It’s not the building.”