BOA agenda 060815 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

been on the site and they have seen the berm. The only contradicted evidence we have about what the site looks 1 like are from my witnesses and they talk about a physical structure. There is a man made at the top of a natural rise. 2 They have cleverly used a natural drainage to help make them shoot into the ground. That is one of the things the 3 sheriff’s department talked about in their emails. We don’t know what we can do, they are shooting downhill so it 4 appears it is safe shooting. That is not the question in front of you. We also have a shooting platform area. We have 5 evidence that massive, not massive, large trees have been cleared; there are targets that have been put up. There is 6 nothing in the ordinance that says you have to have a certain kind of shooting building, a certain number of targets or 7 other protections. You have a situation where there is a structure and there is evidence of use and we are fortunate 8 that nobody has been shot by a stray bullet tonight. I thank you very much for your time and I appreciation your 9 consideration of this matter. 10 11 Anthony Taibi: Even under Mr. Morphis’ definition from that act, it has to be something that is operating, having some 12 land, you got 34 acres of land, you take your bobcat and knock some things over and make yourself, that is a 13 shooting range. That is a place where you shoot. If I go in my back yard and put something up, paper targets taped 14 up, that makes a facility? There is no membership, no club, are we going to get focused on who is a family member 15 or start defining who is a family member and have lists of family members to answer this question? There are really 16 two different questions here. One question is the one that is not before you and that is how ought shooting ranges … 17 how should shooting activities be regulated in the county. The county is changing its character, its going from being 18 rural to being more urban and there have been some issues made that maybe my client has not always been a good 19 neighbor. But that is not the question here. This is about zoning and it doesn’t have to be a profit making business 20 but there has to be an operation. It has to be a facility. This is about do you have a facility. This is 34 acres of 21 undeveloped land. People are going to shoot, you knock down a few trees, you put up some paper towers. There is 22 a couple of boards over some wet spots does not make it a facility. There is no operation, there is no club, there is 23 no organized activity of any kind. There are just some people shooting. Should that be regulated? We have heard 24 testimony that the sheriff has told people that this is not something he can intervene but they call him 10 times but he 25 says it is not his business. The EPA is interested in intervening. I believe in the idea that laws about not just we want 26 something how can we make it happen but that there is a right procedure and a right place to go for the remedy. 27 There is the law of nuisance. They can go and get regulations changed about how the county regulates the 28 discharge of firearms. We even offered to voluntarily take some steps that would make them a better neighbor but 29 what it isn’t is a land use decision. Certainly, the staff in coming to that decision was supported by reason and 30 evidence. It’s not in their brief to be a roving commission to right every wrong and take up everybody who maybe 31 wasn’t always the best neighbor. Their job is, do I have evidence, is there something that is clearly a violation of the 32 land use rule. Not to see if they can twist the land use rule into being an instrument for people to highjack the zoning 33 process for their political end. Let’s do that in a political arena. Thank you. 34 35 Larry Wright: Do you have any questions for the counsel? Have we declared jurisdiction on the points… 36 37 Michael Harvey: Mr. Chairman, if it’s not your intent to have any additional testimony, you need to close the public 38 hearing. I’d ask Mr. Bryan about that. 39 40 James Bryan: You close the public hearing, you don’t have closed session. 41 42 Larry Wright: I’m sorry. We are not closing the public hearing for board discussion on the process. Any questions 43 before we do this? On the initial point of order that I made, I didn’t know we really had to close the public hearing. 44 Mr. Bryan, will you summarize how we are to proceed on this. 45 46 James Bryan: I think you, as a board, have ruled on standing on the subpoena and jurisdiction. You heard all the 47 testimony the parties intended to give. I would rule on whether there is a shooting range or not, whether you believe 48 there is enough evidence to support the Notice of Violation. There was an opportunity to say the NOV doesn’t exist 49 because the rescission eliminated it. I think you have already granted jurisdiction so the question is do we have 50 46