Orange County NC Website
2 <br />amendment stipulates only warnings would be issued for lack of compliance with the tethering <br />restrictions during the six-month period following the date the ordinance actually becomes <br />effective. <br />In response to direction received from the BOCC at its fall work session, Animal Services staff <br />sought to ensure broad awareness of the proposed tethering ordinance. In preparation for a <br />public hearing at the May 20th, 2008, BOCC meeting, staff issued media advisories and posted <br />flyers to ensure interested parties were aware of and invited to participate in the public hearing. <br />In addition, a set of frequently asked questions (FAQ) was developed and posted on the Animal <br />Services website (http://www.co.orange.nc.us/animalservices), along with the proposed <br />amendment, the Tethering Committee's full report, and the staff document recommending <br />kennel sizes. <br />At the May 20th BOCC public hearing, over twenty-five citizens spoke, offering diverse and <br />varied opinions. It was clear there were very strong feelings on both sides of the issue. Many <br />of the issues expressed at the meeting had been previously heard by the Tethering Committee <br />during public input meetings. Exceptions for "escape artist" doggy and hunting or sporting dogs <br />were considered, but ultimately decided against by the Tethering Committee because they were <br />believed to be unworkable. For hunting and sporting dogs, the Tethering Committee decided <br />against a full exception, but did allow for an exception during actual sporting or hunting events. <br />At the end of the May 20th ~ublic hearing, the BOCC decided to reschedule tethering as an <br />agenda item for their June 3 meeting so there would be ample opportunity for them to consider <br />and reflect upon different viewpoints, as well as the work of the Tethering Committee and <br />ASAB. In many respects, the June 3`~ BOCC meeting mirrored the public hearing itself. No <br />fewer members of the public spoke than at the public hearing and again they expressed strong <br />and contradictory views. As a result of the sheer volume of testimony, the Board was not able <br />to discuss the agenda item itself. <br />At the end of testimony presented at the June 3~ meeting, the BOCC indicated the issue of <br />tethering would be brought back in September. Thus tethering is again being scheduled as an <br />agenda item with the expectation the BOCC will have the internal discussion that is an essential <br />step in its decision-making process. In this way, the BOCC will be able to consider the <br />proposed tethering ordinance, its critical elements and their justification, opinions heard from <br />members of the public as well as the recommendation of the ASAB and Tethering Committee. <br />To facilitate preparation for BOCC discussion, Animal Services staff has summarized the <br />concerns expressed by individuals who spoke for and against tethering at the May 20th and <br />June 3`~ BOCC meetings. In addition to the proposed ordinance itself, this summary, and the <br />documents upon which it is based, are provided as attachments. Additional supporting <br />documents are available in hard copy at the Clerk's Office or at the Animal Services website <br />(http://www.co.orange.nc.us/animalservices). These include the Abstracts for May 20th, 2008 <br />BOCC Public Hearing and June 3 , BOCC Meeting; the Tethering Committee's Final Report 8 <br />Recommendations; an Animal Services Staff Memorandum Recommending Minimum Kennel <br />Size Requirements; Tethering Committee Meeting Summaries; and ASAB Minutes from <br />Meetings with Discussion on Tethering. <br />Related recent developments in Durham County deserve summary in this abstract. On <br />September 8th, 2008, Durham's Board of County Commissioner adopted an amendment to the <br />County's animal control ordinances that limits tethering effective January 1, 2010. Under the <br />