Minutes 10-01-2013 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

kept for the purpose of increasing a feeling of security; however, only a small percentage of those dogs bite. He said the problem with taking out the definition of watch dog is that it only leaves the option for people to spend thousands of dollars and increase their liability by having a trained attack dog on their property. He said no dogs are allowed to run free, and these dogs will have to be contained. He said he agrees that a middle ground needs to be found, but he wants to keep the watch dog definition in there, with a way to define it. Commissioner McKee said Durham County has a different solution for appeals. He said their appeals board resides in the sheriff's office and is made up of three members of county staff and two members of the general public. He is in favor of an independent appeals board. He does not question any motives of the ASAB, but he feels that residents will be more comfortable if these two boards are separate. Commissioner Price echoed Commissioner McKee's comments. She said she would like to keep the watch dog definition and come up with better definition of trespassing. She said her concern about the appeals board is that the members should be vetted if their responsibilities are to be expanded. Commissioner Gordon said good points have been made regarding the two extremes related to the watch dog definition. She thinks this issue should be addressed. She feels the appeals process needs to be worked on, and there should be sworn testimony. She has not made up her mind yet about who should be the appeals board, but she does feel there should be work done on the definition of trespassing; Chair Jacobs said he originally thought there should be another step between ASAB and the courts, and he still thinks this is a possibility. He is comfortable with the ASAB hearing appeals at the current time. He said he is also amenable to another step. He said he is very uncomfortable with the issue of trespassing. He said there are very few innocent trespassing incidents in the rural areas. He said, in the case of a trespassing child, a parent should be in a position of supervision. He said there is a middle ground that needs to be found. He said there may not need to be a definition of a watchdog, but there needs to be definition of an animal that is on its property minding its own business when a human comes on to the property and is not minding their own business. He said things do not have to reach a point of going so quickly from a benign situation to a quasi-judicial situation. Commissioner Dorosin said the problem with the current definition of watch dog is that it encompasses every single dog that exists. He does not see a way to make a separate category. He thinks that the idea of some intermediate step before the vicious dog determination is a good one. He said all of the facts need to be looked at per case. He said there is an implicit invitation to be solicited unless there is a sign that says otherwise; and this is one reason why the appeals process is so important for providing a case by case analysis. Commissioner Pelissier said she feels the watch dog definition is useless. She asked the attorney if there could be a different definition of trespassing. John Roberts said the trespassing definition can be modified. He said the best idea is to modify it to refer to the criminal trespass statutes, as provided in NC General Statute 14, article 22b. He said there are two different trespass statutes provided in that article; one would cover someone who climbs over your fence, and the other would cover someone who comes onto or stays on your property after being told to leave. Commissioner Pelissier gave the example of someone being bitten by a dog when it was not a case of trespass. She asked if this dog is automatically declared vicious if it is not normally aggressive. She said this needs to be clearer.