Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Municipalities <br /> • Historically, Animal Control provided service to the unincorporated parts of the County <br /> — Hillsborough has received service from the county since the 1987 ordinance's <br /> adoption <br /> — Chapel Hill contracted with Animal Protection Society prior to OCAS creation <br /> (2004) <br /> — Carrboro had separate Animal Control officer until 2013 (on-call provided <br /> previously by OCAS) <br /> — Mebane continues to provide its own Animal Control services (despite overtures <br /> from OCAS) <br /> Reasons to Unify <br /> • To create a coherent and integrated ordinance for Orange County as a whole <br /> — The municipalities that receive animal control services each have different <br /> ordinances <br /> — Ordinances are confusing to public, staff and judiciary process <br /> • To provide necessary & overdue updates <br /> — Reflect consolidation of sheltering and animal control operations in OCAS <br /> • To fill critical gaps <br /> — Years of judicial process have identified important gaps within each of the <br /> ordinances <br /> — Hampers department's ability to protect the public and animals of the county <br /> Staff Attorney Annette Moore, presented the following slides: <br /> Summary of Recommendations <br /> • Updating ordinance to reflect OCAS department creation <br /> • Keeping & displaying of wild animals <br /> • Creating an appeal process for administrative orders and civil citations <br /> • Designating only animal control staff as cruelty investigators <br /> • Creating authority for assuring humane treatment of animals and humane euthanasia <br /> • Adding differentiation of public nuisances created by cats <br /> • Establishing authority sufficient to effectively regulate potentially dangerous dogs <br /> Summary of Public Concerns <br /> • Livestock as nuisance animals <br /> — § 4-45. (b) (6) added: "at large off the premises of the owner or Keeper, exce t <br /> in the case of domestic livestock the Animal Services Director shall have the <br /> discretion to determine a violation" [pg 23, strikethrough version of <br /> recommended ordinance <br /> • Dangerous vs. Vicious <br /> — Existing county ordinance includes vicious animals <br /> — Any added language comes from Chapel Hill and Carrboro ordinances <br /> • No appeal process for vicious dog declaration <br /> — Existing ordinance has no appeal process, but proposed unified ordinance does <br /> contain an appeal process for vicious dog declarations, as well as other <br /> administrative orders <br /> • Dual declaration appeals <br />