A taxpayer lawsuit accusing Riverside County of misusing public funds on a $2.45 million shelter consulting contract has been refiled, reviving a legal fight over whether county leaders dodged normal bidding rules to hire a Texas-based consultant. The amended complaint, filed by the Walter Clark Legal Group, names County Executive Officer Jeff Van Wagenen and alleges taxpayer and county funds were improperly used in connection with the contract awarded to consultant Kristen Hassen.
The complaint alleges Riverside County structured the deal as a sole-source agreement rather than opening it to competitive bidding, a move that plaintiffs' attorney Dan Bolton says the county never justified with a genuine emergency. As reported by NBC Palm Springs, Bolton contends the county did not establish that an emergency existed to justify bypassing its standard contracting process. Under Riverside County Municipal Ordinance 459, a sole-source contract requires a demonstrated emergency threatening life, property, or county operations — but Van Wagenen's written justification did not allege such an emergency when approving the deal, according to reporting from the Uken Report.
The refiled complaint also raises a registration problem: Hassen's firm, Outcomes for Pets Consulting, LLC, was not registered to do business in California until March 26, 2026 — roughly 18 months after Riverside County supervisors first approved the contract in September 2024, per the same Uken Report account. County contracting guidelines generally require vendors doing business with Riverside County to be registered in good standing with the county, making the gap a central plank of the plaintiffs' case.
How the Deal Was Approved
Records from the Riverside County Clerk of the Board show the contract with Hassen was approved on September 17, 2024, as item 3.43, with a term through December 31, 2026, according to a Facebook post relayed by NBC Palm Springs.
The scale of the spending has drawn scrutiny in shelter litigation, as reported by Animals 24-7.
The lawsuit was originally filed on November 25, 2024, by Walter Clark Legal Group attorneys Walter T. Clark and Dan Bolton on behalf of 11 local plaintiffs, following an earlier writ of mandate petition filed in August 2024. In March 2025, a Riverside County Superior Court judge dismissed the initial wasteful-spending claims for lack of factual detail but gave plaintiffs 30 days to amend and refile, according to Animal Politics. That earlier ruling allowed broader claims about mandatory animal care duties to move forward while requiring deeper factual support for the taxpayer waste allegations — setting the stage for this month's refiling.
A Leadership Shake-Up Before the Contract
The legal action ties the consulting contract to the September 2024 departure of former Animal Services Director Erin Gettis, who held an architecture degree but no shelter management background before Van Wagenen transferred her to a hospital executive position paying up to $274,830 annually, according to the Walter Clark Legal Group. That reassignment came two weeks after animal advocates filed their initial lawsuit over shelter care standards, as previously reported by MyNewsLA.com.
The refiled complaint seeks to have Van Wagenen repay money paid to Hassen under the contract, according to the allegations. Riverside County Animal Services — the department the consulting contract was meant to help keep operating — has been under severe strain. The department manages 30,000 to 35,000 animals annually across four municipal facilities and was operating at over 220% of maximum capacity in mid-2026, a crunch so severe that the county coordinated an out-of-state transport flight of shelter animals, as Hoodline previously reported when 58 shelter dogs landed in Chester County, Pennsylvania.
The Hayden Act Dispute
The financial fight over the contract is intertwined with a broader legal battle over shelter conditions and whether state law obligates the county to limit euthanasia. The broader dispute has included questions about funding-related limits and the enforceability of California's 1998 Hayden Act, which restricts shelter euthanasia. A 2023 California appellate decision in Santa Paula Animal Rescue Center v. County of Los Angeles affirmed that public shelters carry mandatory, legally enforceable duties under Civil Code §1834.4 and Food & Agriculture Code §32003 to provide prompt veterinary care and maintain accurate records, Animal Politics notes, establishing the governing case law courts have used to evaluate similar shelter compliance disputes.
For its part, Riverside County has said it is addressing the complaint and will present relevant facts and information during the court process, per NBC Palm Springs. The county has also said the amended allegations are similar to claims previously dismissed by a judge in a related case, Woodruff v. Gettis, and noted it is limited in what it can share while the matter proceeds. The county has disputed the complaint's claims, and the allegations remain unproven in court.
