Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
15 <br />--should have their needs addressed. If it’s not in here then the whole thing falls apart; we’re <br />back to the Lenoir ordinance, which is a useless piece of paper. <br />Mr. Tesoro asked where the noise part of the Committee mandate comes from. When I filled out <br />my application, it said “Firearms Safety Committee.” Commissioner McKee read from the <br />BOCC’s March 1, 2016 agenda abstract, which includes noise in the Committee charge. It also is <br />repeated on May 17, he said, in the charge when we appointed the Committee. <br />Mr. Tesoro said that the Committee tried to define “sustained” at an earlier meeting but was not <br />able to do so. Other words, like “alarming” and “disturbing” all come back to perception, he said. <br />I don’t think we can answer that. Ms. Conti explained that the “reasonable person standard” is a <br />valid legal standard through which those terms can be defined. <br />The facilitator said that the Committee appeared to be at the point where it has consensus on an <br />ordinance that contains (a) –(f) and a non-ordinance recommendation regarding community <br />education on firearms safety, but that it does not have consensus on any revision to (g). The <br />Board of Commissioners can read the meeting notes for background, he said, and individuals on <br />the Committee can write or speak to them about the different perspectives they have regarding <br />noise. He suggested a vote on recommending an ordinance that excludes (g) and the non- <br />ordinance recommendation. <br />Commissioner McKee said that in the end the decision comes back to the Board of <br />Commissioners. Our Board does not have to adhere to any recommendation or it can adhere to <br />every recommendation or it can add other things if we decide to. You allhave done some good <br />work. I understand it when Ms. Conti says that without (g) the Committee has wasted it’s time, <br />but I do not think the Committee has wasted its time. I can guarantee that every Commissioner <br />has read every minute that has come out of this four month conversation. We created this <br />Committee to get input from a group of people who were not the focal points of that meeting in <br />February. We wanted an extended conversation in our community, outside of our Board,to get <br />some recommendations. If the recommendations come back (a) –(f) then we will consider it. If <br />they come back with (g) included then we’ll consider it. I can’t tell you what the Board might or <br />might not do. <br />I would recommend that you not let the hunt for the perfect interfere with the possible, he said. <br />From what I see, (a) –(f) gives law enforcement some teeth. I understand the noise issue. I don’t <br />know that I agree that the noise issue is absolutely critical to the Sheriff’s ability to respond to a <br />call and, if they get out there and see a person shooting into a pile of rock or at a six-inch <br />diameter tree, they have some means of doing something. Back in May when they responded to <br />Dr. Arvik’s call they didn’t have anything; if (a) –(f) passes then they will have something. Do <br />we have a perfect document tonight? No. Will we have a perfect document after the Board of