Agenda - 01-21-2016 - 6-a - Minutes

Browse Search

14 1 document, but can be amended as needed going forward, and is a great improvement of the 2 process currently in place. 3 Michelle Walker said she had served as either Chair or Vice Chair of the ASAB through 4 this process and appreciated the hard work of all the staff involved in reviewing the information 5 to create the current proposed UAO. She said the ASAB made efforts to get input from their 6 public partners. 7 Commissioner Pelissier said she appreciated all of their efforts. She referred to page 8 149 in the electronic copy, which discusses the appeals process. She asked if it would be 9 practically possible for the Board of County Commissioners to appoint someone to this panel. 10 Annette Moore suggested that the Board would designate someone ahead of time. She 11 said if the issue is in the county, then that person would be from the County, while the third 12 person would be from the area in question. 13 Commissioner Pelissier asked if the Board would follow the same boards and 14 commissions' applicant process. 15 Annette Moore said yes and suggested adding an alternate as well. 16 Commissioner Price said she had several concerns. She said she is concerned with 17 giving sole discretion to one person. 18 Annette Moore said the sections that include discretion also have appeal processes 19 attached to them. 20 Commissioner Price said she understood that an example of sole discretion could be 21 destroying an animal prior the appeals process. 22 Annette Moore said destroying an animal is always a last resort. 23 Commissioner Price referred to page 26 of the hard copy where Section h-2 and 3 say 24 an animal can be destroyed. 25 Bob Marotto said there is not any intention to give the Animal Services Director 26 unmeasured power. He said discretion is subject to judicial review as well as the appeal 27 process. He said the administering of this code will be done most judiciously to insure public 28 safety but not by destroying an animal prior to a judicial process. 29 Commissioner Price asked if there is a specific purpose for the microchip and if the 30 public can decline it. 31 Bob Marotto said there was one complaint circulated in an email and there was a 32 sustained response to that concern that noted the absence of medical complications of a 33 microchip. 34 Bob Marotto said the only exception would be a medical opinion that implanting the chip 35 would be detrimental to an animal. He said the chip is for identification for both the owners and 36 Animal Services. 37 Commissioner Price referred to Section 4.33 and asked if there could be clarification of 38 the statement, "only Orange County employees shall be designated as an animal cruelty 39 investigator." 40 Annette Moore said the statute allows for the designation of non-employees to be animal 41 cruelty investigators and she said the County will only allow employees to fill this role. 42 Commissioner Price asked if one must first be an employee or could one be hired to fill 43 this role. 44 Bob Marotto said one could be hired as a County employee to fill the position. He said 45 cruelty investigator is a designation in the North Carolina General Statute. 46 Commissioner Rich said she has concerns about the appeals process, noting two ASAB 47 members sit on the panel. She asked if it would be possible to separate what the Board 48 members do on the ASAB from their role on the appeals panel. She asked if there is a conflict 49 of interest. 50 John Roberts said individuals serving on the ASAB are favorable for serving on the 51 appeals panel since they are familiar with the ordinance, instead of a random person.