Minutes 06-04-2013 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

basis of the action of the Town Board of Commissioners, as it is codified in the Town's own animal ordinance, which allows it to depart from the County's code where they wish to do so. Presently, the Town of Hillsborough does so only through the prohibition of roosters and permitting requirements for farm animals within city limits. The North Carolina General Statute §153A-45 provides that in order for an ordinance to be adopted on its first reading it "must receive the approval of all the members of the Board of Commissioners. If the ordinance is approved by a majority of those voting but not by all the members of the board... it shall be considered at the next regular meeting of the board." The Board then has 100 days after introduction of the ordinance to adopt the change to the Ordinance. Staff Attorney Annette Moore said that if this is approved, the advisory board would like to take this to Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Hillsborough and the small portion of Durham in Orange County. Bob Marotto said the board has resisted the scope creep of creating new laws. He said there was one exception to this, where a recommendation was made for an amendment on animal recovery. This amendment requires a micro-chip fee for dogs and cats recovered for the first time; a refundable sterilization deposit for people whose pets have been impounded and recovered two times; and a differential recovery fee structure for the recovery of animals sterilized, versus those that are reproductive- with higher rates for non-sterilized animals. He said this was done to address the pet overpopulation in the county and reduce reliance on euthanasia. PUBLIC COMMENT: Allan Green is an Orange County farmer. He addressed several handouts at the Commissioner's places and read from the following statement: I want to thank the commissioners for this opportunity to speak. I am Allan Green, an Orange County farmer, and member of the Agriculture Preservation Board (APB), although I am not here tonight representing the Board. I will be addressing two related issues described in the background material I provided to you. The first originated over 4 years ago, on March 3 d 2009 when an ice storm shorted out our electric fence. One of our small Dexter cows went through the fence, and was grazing outside my fences next to Orange Grove road on property I partially own. A helpful passer-by called Animal Control, and even though the cow was quickly confined, I was cited and subsequently fined because my cow as at-large, and by definition, a public nuisance. Because the animal represented no real nuisance or public danger, I appealed to both the manager and director of Animal Services; but they refused to void the citation, citing the language of our ordinance: an animal at-large is a public nuisance, period. As a farmer, this narrow definition seemed inconsistent with my experience and common sense, and worth investigating. I began by researching similar provisions of the animal control ordinances of surrounding counties. Attachment 2 summarizes the results: including our 10 neighboring counties, only Orange County categorically defines at at-large animals as a nuisance, at least in unincorporated jurisdictions. While ordinances vary, our neighboring counties reserve violations for actual nuisance behavior while an animal is at-large. I then brought the issue to the APB, and in March 2010, our chairperson met with the ASAB and requested a meeting to discuss our position. Which brings be to my second issue. Attachment 1 is Director Marotto's response to that request. He describes the issue as a waste of staff resources and unnecessary because animal control officers have the discretion we are recommending. But, that is not what our ordinance says, and no discretion was exercised in my case in 2009. Keeping and ordinance on the books so that it can be selectively enforced is simply wrong. I am therefore asking the Commissioners to direct Animal Services staff and the Animal Services Advisory Board to work cooperatively with the Agriculture Preservation Board to make our Animal Control Ordinance more consistent with the realities of rural life. Thank you. Ed Johnson lives on 60 acres of land in the Orange Grove community. He said this proposed ordinance is not ready yet and needs more work. He said last year, two of his dogs were declared vicious animals, when an intruder came into his yard and one of his dogs bit the intruder during a confrontation.