The sound of barking dogs and wagging tails might soon blend with city business in Frisco. Wiggle Butt Academy, a local dog training and behavior center, is hoping to team up with the city’s Animal Facility in a new public-private partnership. The collaboration aims to expand the city’s animal services and give shelter dogs a better chance at finding homes.
If approved, the partnership would bring in professional training programs, community events, and educational workshops for pet owners. Supporters say the project could help reduce overcrowding at the facility and improve the overall quality of care for animals.
Supporters see it as a fresh, creative way to enhance animal care and community programs, but not everyone on the City Council agrees.
Council members like Brian Livingston have voiced doubts about how the plan will work, leaving residents questioning whether this partnership will strengthen Frisco’s animal services, or make them more complicated. He worries the proposal may unintentionally overlook the very problems it hopes to fix.
“We want a feasibility study to make sure this solves a problem and isn’t a $13 million vanity project similar to the failed Frisco Center for the Arts project,” Frisco City Councilman Brian Livingston said. “Personally, based on feedback from the city staff, I don’t believe this project is needed nor will it actually provide much in terms of service to the city,” Livingston said.
Livingston has raised doubts about funding, management responsibilities, and how the partnership would balance public and private interests. His caution isn’t new; it reflects years of experience managing budgets and looking out for taxpayers, a role he says requires asking hard questions before committing public dollars and avoiding unnecessary strain on families.
Others argue that the city should focus on improving its existing animal facility before introducing outside organizations. Supporters believe the collaboration could open doors for new resources, better training, and more outreach to local pet owners, benefits they say could outweigh the potential risks.
Livingston says he’s been listening closely to residents who fear the plan may be expensive without offering clear solutions; a concern he says deserves equal weight as the push for new services.
“Mainly, I have heard from those citizens against it saying it costs too much and it isn’t well thought out,” Livingston said. “The main concern is mixing strays or abandoned animals that may be sick with animals that are being taken care of. Lots of issues about safety and health,” Livingston said, pointing to Frisco’s long dependence on the Collin County Animal Shelter to house stray and unclaimed animals.
Frisco has never operated its own full animal shelter; instead, the city has sent its animals to the county facility, which serves multiple cities. Even as Frisco has grown into one of the fastest-expanding communities in Texas, it still represents only about 11 percent of the animals processed by the county shelter.
That history is what shapes Livingston’s hesitation. To him, the question isn’t whether Frisco needs better animal services. It’s whether the proposed plan genuinely solves the long-standing problem without placing unnecessary strain on taxpayers. Before approving anything, he wants clearer data, a stronger long-term plan, and a structure that truly protects taxpayers.
Livingston hints at what a plan he would support might look like: a facility that is sustainable in the long term, and directly improves safety, health, and local access for residents and their pets. One that actually meets the city’s growing needs.
The partnership being discussed could bring new opportunities for students, offering hands-on volunteer roles, basic training experience, and a chance to learn how animal care connects to community service.
Livingston explains how the model would work. “The City of Frisco would build the animal facility to accommodate both the private company, Wiggle Butt, their vet, and a holding facility for Frisco Animal Services,” he said. The city, he added, could charge Wiggle Butt rent to help offset construction and maintenance costs. Any services the company provides to the city, like training, or housing help, would count toward that rent.
This plan reflects Livingston’s practical style. He is known for analyzing a project’s financial core long before the ribbon-cutting stage, pushing for approaches that keep taxpayer costs low.
“This facility could change how Frisco handles lost and stray animals,” he said. “Instead of relying on the county shelter, residents would have a local option. The setup is simple: the city owns the building, Wiggle Butt runs it. That way, taxpayers aren’t paying for all the staff and daily operations.”
The financial structure he describes is one he believes could work and help stabilize the budget. It’s the type of model that aligns with his reputation at City Hall. A former business owner with years of experience managing budgets, Livingston is known for focusing on the financial backbone of a proposal before anything else. Supporters call it steady; critics call it cautious. For Livingston, it’s straightforward; Frisco should invest in solutions that won’t leave residents facing expensive surprises later on.
“They would get a state-of-the-art facility built for their business, and the City of Frisco would be a client,” Livingston said. To him, the credibility of the people running the facility matters just as much as the structure itself. “The owner is a huge animal advocate.”
As Frisco continues to weigh the future of its animal services, the proposed partnership between Wiggle Butt Academy and the city stands at a crossroads between innovation and caution. Supporters see a chance to modernize care, boost adoptions, and bring services closer to home, while critics like Councilman Brian Livingston warn against rushing into an expensive plan without a clear objective.
With the City Council now moving forward on a Letter of Intent, the next few months will determine whether this partnership becomes a model for collaboration or another costly project that fails to deliver on its promise.